On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 7:28 AM, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 26 June 2015 at 15:25, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 26/06/2015 16:04, Peter Maydell wrote:
>>> Ping?
>>
>> Oh, YIELD was what I was thinking of in the thread about IPIs, not WFE
>> (which would require SEV on the other core)...
>
> Li
Am 26.06.2015 um 16:04 schrieb Peter Maydell:
> Ping?
OK for me.
Best regards
Alex
>
> thanks
> -- PMM
>
> On 15 June 2015 at 19:49, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> This patchset makes the ARM and Thumb encodings of the YIELD hint
>> instruction in the ARM cause the TCG CPU to yield control back
>> t
On 26 June 2015 at 15:25, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
>
> On 26/06/2015 16:04, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> Ping?
>
> Oh, YIELD was what I was thinking of in the thread about IPIs, not WFE
> (which would require SEV on the other core)...
Linux doesn't in practice put YIELD insns into its busy loops,
so thi
On 26/06/2015 16:04, Peter Maydell wrote:
> Ping?
Oh, YIELD was what I was thinking of in the thread about IPIs, not WFE
(which would require SEV on the other core)...
The patches look good, but I cannot really say much about this code.
Paolo
> thanks
> -- PMM
>
> On 15 June 2015 at 19:49, P
Ping?
thanks
-- PMM
On 15 June 2015 at 19:49, Peter Maydell wrote:
> This patchset makes the ARM and Thumb encodings of the YIELD hint
> instruction in the ARM cause the TCG CPU to yield control back
> to the top level loop. This brings them into line with the A64
> encoding which already did th
