From: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
To: Matt Fleming <matt@console-pimps.org>
Cc: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@novell.com>,
hpa@linux.intel.com, mjg@redhat.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, john stultz <johnstul@us.ibm.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>,
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy.fitzhardinge@citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86, efi: Don't recursively acquire rtc_lock
Date: Mon, 08 Aug 2011 17:18:17 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4E3FF029.4060401@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1312810836.10579.127.camel@mfleming-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com>
On 08/08/2011 04:40 PM, Matt Fleming wrote:
> On Fri, 2011-08-05 at 18:04 +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >
> > Virtual platforms will have to take care of the serialization in the
> > host anyway, so the guest side implementation of getwallclock et al
> > is entirely unaffected.
>
> Ah, OK, that's the important part. I didn't realise that rtc_lock isn't
> actually required by any other code. In which case, yes, it completely
> makes sense to push the locking of rtc_lock down into the
> implementations that actually need it.
>
> It'd be great if I could get some ACK's from the virtualization guys.
Ack (for that aspect).
--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-08-08 14:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-08-05 17:04 [PATCH] x86, efi: Don't recursively acquire rtc_lock Jan Beulich
2011-08-08 13:40 ` Matt Fleming
2011-08-08 14:07 ` Jan Beulich
2011-08-10 9:03 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-08-10 9:36 ` Jan Beulich
2011-08-10 9:51 ` Ingo Molnar
2011-08-10 13:12 ` Jan Beulich
2011-08-15 18:18 ` Matt Fleming
2011-08-16 6:22 ` Jan Beulich
2011-08-16 9:14 ` Matt Fleming
2011-08-30 15:45 ` Matthew Garrett
2011-08-30 16:07 ` Matt Fleming
2011-08-30 18:27 ` H. Peter Anvin
2011-08-10 14:55 ` Jan Beulich
2011-08-08 14:18 ` Avi Kivity [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2011-08-05 17:02 Jan Beulich
2011-08-04 2:53 Jan Beulich
2011-08-04 3:04 ` Matthew Garrett
2011-08-04 9:33 ` Matt Fleming
2011-08-03 21:04 Matt Fleming
2011-08-03 23:10 ` Tony Luck
2011-08-03 23:12 ` H. Peter Anvin
2011-08-04 10:22 ` john stultz
2011-08-04 10:36 ` Matt Fleming
2011-08-04 11:36 ` Matthew Garrett
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4E3FF029.4060401@redhat.com \
--to=avi@redhat.com \
--cc=hpa@linux.intel.com \
--cc=jbeulich@novell.com \
--cc=jeremy.fitzhardinge@citrix.com \
--cc=johnstul@us.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=matt@console-pimps.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=mjg@redhat.com \
--cc=mtosatti@redhat.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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.