Avi Kivity wrote:
The congruent case which comes to mind is lazy FPU handling.That one has preempt_ops in hardware: cr0.ts and #NM.
However, that doesn't handle in-kernel use of the fpu. kernel_fpu_begin()/kernel_fpu_end() could easily be modified to take advantage of a generic preempt hook. I'll add a patch for that, and we gain preemptible raid-5 parity calculation.
-- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- References:
- [PATCH][RFC] kvm-scheduler integration
- From: Avi Kivity <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH][RFC] kvm-scheduler integration
- From: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH][RFC] kvm-scheduler integration
- From: Avi Kivity <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH][RFC] kvm-scheduler integration
- From: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>
- Re: [kvm-devel] [PATCH][RFC] kvm-scheduler integration
- From: Rusty Russell <[email protected]>
- Re: [kvm-devel] [PATCH][RFC] kvm-scheduler integration
- From: Avi Kivity <[email protected]>
- Re: [kvm-devel] [PATCH][RFC] kvm-scheduler integration
- From: Rusty Russell <[email protected]>
- Re: [kvm-devel] [PATCH][RFC] kvm-scheduler integration
- From: Avi Kivity <[email protected]>
- Re: [kvm-devel] [PATCH][RFC] kvm-scheduler integration
- From: Rusty Russell <[email protected]>
- Re: [kvm-devel] [PATCH][RFC] kvm-scheduler integration
- From: Avi Kivity <[email protected]>
- [PATCH][RFC] kvm-scheduler integration
- Prev by Date: Re: [EXT4 set 8][PATCH 1/1]Add journal checksums
- Next by Date: Re: [EXT4 set 4][PATCH 1/5] i_version:64 bit inode version
- Previous by thread: Re: [kvm-devel] [PATCH][RFC] kvm-scheduler integration
- Next by thread: Re: [PATCH][RFC] kvm-scheduler integration
- Index(es):
 |