From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@siemens.com>
Subject: Re: qemu-kvm.git build problem
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2010 11:21:59 +0100
Message-ID: <4B4AFBC7.1020801@siemens.com>
References: <1262025646.2774.16.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1263014581.2439.207.camel@localhost.localdomain> <4B4AF9D2.3080100@siemens.com> <4B4AFAD9.3010604@redhat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Lucas Meneghel Rodrigues <lmr@redhat.com>,
	KVM mailing list <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
	Michael Goldish <mgoldish@redhat.com>,
	Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com>,
	Dor Laor <dlaor@redhat.com>
To: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
Return-path: <kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from david.siemens.de ([192.35.17.14]:16979 "EHLO david.siemens.de"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1753009Ab0AKKWQ (ORCPT <rfc822;kvm@vger.kernel.org>);
	Mon, 11 Jan 2010 05:22:16 -0500
In-Reply-To: <4B4AFAD9.3010604@redhat.com>
Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <kvm.vger.kernel.org>

Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 01/11/2010 12:13 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> BTW, does anybody know how to back-port synchronize_srcu_expedited best?
>> It looked like a simple mapping to synchronize_srcu was not sufficient
>> to achieve the same performance as with the pre-srcu locking (e.g.
>> guest&host stalled during guest's framebuffer setup).
>>    
> 
> Isn't it sufficient to backport kernel/srcu.c?  I thought no sched.c 
> changes were necessary.

Haven't looked yet, but if that's the case, it would indeed be
straightforward.

Jan

-- 
Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT T DE IT 1
Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux