diff for duplicates of <1370386432.748.22@snotra> diff --git a/a/1.txt b/N1/1.txt index 4ef3d56..5784b92 100644 --- a/a/1.txt +++ b/N1/1.txt @@ -1,23 +1,23 @@ On 06/03/2013 03:54:28 PM, Mihai Caraman wrote: -> Adopt AltiVec approach to increase laziness by calling +> Adopt AltiVec approach to increase laziness by calling =20 > kvmppc_load_guest_fp() > just before returning to guest instaed of each sched in. -> +>=20 > Signed-off-by: Mihai Caraman <mihai.caraman@freescale.com> -If you did this *before* adding Altivec it would have saved a question +If you did this *before* adding Altivec it would have saved a question =20 in an earlier patch. :-) > --- > arch/powerpc/kvm/booke.c | 1 + > arch/powerpc/kvm/e500mc.c | 2 -- > 2 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) -> +>=20 > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kvm/booke.c b/arch/powerpc/kvm/booke.c > index 019496d..5382238 100644 > --- a/arch/powerpc/kvm/booke.c > +++ b/arch/powerpc/kvm/booke.c -> @@ -1258,6 +1258,7 @@ int kvmppc_handle_exit(struct kvm_run *run, +> @@ -1258,6 +1258,7 @@ int kvmppc_handle_exit(struct kvm_run *run, =20 > struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, > } else { > kvmppc_lazy_ee_enable(); @@ -25,15 +25,15 @@ in an earlier patch. :-) > + kvmppc_load_guest_fp(vcpu); > } > } -> +>=20 You should probably do these before kvmppc_lazy_ee_enable(). -Actually, I don't think this is a good idea at all. As I understand -it, you're not supposed to take kernel ownersship of floating point in -non-atomic context, because an interrupt could itself call +Actually, I don't think this is a good idea at all. As I understand =20 +it, you're not supposed to take kernel ownersship of floating point in =20 +non-atomic context, because an interrupt could itself call =20 enable_kernel_fp(). Do you have benchmarks showing it's even worthwhile? --Scott +-Scott= diff --git a/a/content_digest b/N1/content_digest index 6365f3b..7df3f2c 100644 --- a/a/content_digest +++ b/N1/content_digest @@ -1,34 +1,34 @@ "ref\01370292868-2697-7-git-send-email-mihai.caraman@freescale.com\0" "From\0Scott Wood <scottwood@freescale.com>\0" "Subject\0Re: [RFC PATCH 6/6] KVM: PPC: Book3E: Enhance FPU laziness\0" - "Date\0Tue, 04 Jun 2013 22:53:52 +0000\0" + "Date\0Tue, 4 Jun 2013 17:53:52 -0500\0" "To\0Mihai Caraman <mihai.caraman@freescale.com>\0" - "Cc\0kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org" - kvm@vger.kernel.org + "Cc\0Mihai Caraman <mihai.caraman@freescale.com>" linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org - " Mihai Caraman <mihai.caraman@freescale.com>\0" + kvm@vger.kernel.org + " kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org\0" "\00:1\0" "b\0" "On 06/03/2013 03:54:28 PM, Mihai Caraman wrote:\n" - "> Adopt AltiVec approach to increase laziness by calling \n" + "> Adopt AltiVec approach to increase laziness by calling =20\n" "> kvmppc_load_guest_fp()\n" "> just before returning to guest instaed of each sched in.\n" - "> \n" + ">=20\n" "> Signed-off-by: Mihai Caraman <mihai.caraman@freescale.com>\n" "\n" - "If you did this *before* adding Altivec it would have saved a question \n" + "If you did this *before* adding Altivec it would have saved a question =20\n" "in an earlier patch. :-)\n" "\n" "> ---\n" "> arch/powerpc/kvm/booke.c | 1 +\n" "> arch/powerpc/kvm/e500mc.c | 2 --\n" "> 2 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)\n" - "> \n" + ">=20\n" "> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kvm/booke.c b/arch/powerpc/kvm/booke.c\n" "> index 019496d..5382238 100644\n" "> --- a/arch/powerpc/kvm/booke.c\n" "> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kvm/booke.c\n" - "> @@ -1258,6 +1258,7 @@ int kvmppc_handle_exit(struct kvm_run *run, \n" + "> @@ -1258,6 +1258,7 @@ int kvmppc_handle_exit(struct kvm_run *run, =20\n" "> struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,\n" "> \t\t} else {\n" "> \t\t\tkvmppc_lazy_ee_enable();\n" @@ -36,17 +36,17 @@ "> +\t\t\tkvmppc_load_guest_fp(vcpu);\n" "> \t\t}\n" "> \t}\n" - "> \n" + ">=20\n" "\n" "You should probably do these before kvmppc_lazy_ee_enable().\n" "\n" - "Actually, I don't think this is a good idea at all. As I understand \n" - "it, you're not supposed to take kernel ownersship of floating point in \n" - "non-atomic context, because an interrupt could itself call \n" + "Actually, I don't think this is a good idea at all. As I understand =20\n" + "it, you're not supposed to take kernel ownersship of floating point in =20\n" + "non-atomic context, because an interrupt could itself call =20\n" "enable_kernel_fp().\n" "\n" "Do you have benchmarks showing it's even worthwhile?\n" "\n" - -Scott + -Scott= -2a3585356792006eaabd695134f13e1e2c2544a60fc0c6b660684c425c2d92b5 +6f7f3d102a8926dd12efc85ec7efc24fd582594eeda4ef971f62fc78147bbddc
diff --git a/a/content_digest b/N2/content_digest index 6365f3b..18c4a07 100644 --- a/a/content_digest +++ b/N2/content_digest @@ -1,11 +1,11 @@ "ref\01370292868-2697-7-git-send-email-mihai.caraman@freescale.com\0" "From\0Scott Wood <scottwood@freescale.com>\0" "Subject\0Re: [RFC PATCH 6/6] KVM: PPC: Book3E: Enhance FPU laziness\0" - "Date\0Tue, 04 Jun 2013 22:53:52 +0000\0" + "Date\0Tue, 4 Jun 2013 17:53:52 -0500\0" "To\0Mihai Caraman <mihai.caraman@freescale.com>\0" - "Cc\0kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org" - kvm@vger.kernel.org - linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org + "Cc\0<kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org>" + <kvm@vger.kernel.org> + <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org> " Mihai Caraman <mihai.caraman@freescale.com>\0" "\00:1\0" "b\0" @@ -49,4 +49,4 @@ "\n" -Scott -2a3585356792006eaabd695134f13e1e2c2544a60fc0c6b660684c425c2d92b5 +9b7e3aa5d2c71b70ef424b667a3f1ccec1bc0d19d14201dc010327bf0d5739a7
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.