Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 7 Sep 2015 13:45:18 -0700 | Subject | Re: [4.2, Regression] Queued spinlocks cause major XFS performance regression | From | Linus Torvalds <> |
| |
On Sun, Sep 6, 2015 at 11:57 PM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote: > > Just to continue the argument for arguments sake, the function is named > 'virt' (not paravirt) and tests the HYPERVISOR CPUID bit. How is that > not appropriately named?
Well, I think right now one issue is that you can't avoid it, even when you want pure "raw hardware" spinlocks.
I really think it should at the very least be inside CONFIG_PARAVIRT. Because it *is* about helping the hypervisor, so really is about paravirtualization.
So naming is misleading, I think, and the config option situation is not great. If you act differently under virtualization than you do on raw hardware, what would you call that? I'd call it "paravirt".
Linus
| |