From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "H. Peter Anvin" Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC V5 00/11] Paravirtualized ticketlocks Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2011 12:12:47 -0700 Message-ID: <4E9889AF.1050106@zytor.com> References: <1318503245.24856.12.camel@twins> <4E971580.6030300@goop.org> <20111014141701.GA2433@redhat.com> <4E986B2B.60803@goop.org> <4E98815F.6080105@zytor.com> <4E988929.8040801@goop.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Jason Baron , Peter Zijlstra , Linus Torvalds , Ingo Molnar , the arch/x86 maintainers , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Nick Piggin , Avi Kivity , Marcelo Tosatti , KVM , Andi Kleen , Xen Devel , Jeremy Fitzhardinge , konrad.wilk@oracle.com To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge Return-path: In-Reply-To: <4E988929.8040801@goop.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org On 10/14/2011 12:10 PM, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: > > We probably don't want all those implementations (near) inline, so they > would end up being plain function calls anyway. > I would not object if the native one was closer, though; especially in term of source text (the current level of macroization of some operations is horrific.) -hpa