lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Sep]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [4.2, Regression] Queued spinlocks cause major XFS performance regression
From
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


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-09-07 23:01    [W:1.021 / U:0.736 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site