From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933595AbZDHPOd (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Apr 2009 11:14:33 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1758758AbZDHPOW (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Apr 2009 11:14:22 -0400 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([18.85.46.34]:33868 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755359AbZDHPOV (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Apr 2009 11:14:21 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH] Allow preemption during lazy mmu updates From: Peter Zijlstra To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Jeremy Fitzhardinge , Andrew Morton , the arch/x86 maintainers , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Nick Piggin , Thomas Gleixner , Avi Kivity In-Reply-To: <20090408145440.GN12931@elte.hu> References: <1238176963-21093-1-git-send-email-jeremy@goop.org> <20090408145440.GN12931@elte.hu> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Wed, 08 Apr 2009 17:11:52 +0200 Message-Id: <1239203512.4557.2575.camel@laptop> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.26.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2009-04-08 at 16:54 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > kernel/sched.c | 2 - > > Needs the ack of ... oh, never mind - this one is fine i guess ;-) Ah, about that. This new preemption hook has slightly different requirements than the current preempt-notifiers have (hence the new hook), I was wondering if KVM (afaik currently the only preempt-notifier consumer) could live with these requirements. That is, could these be merged?