From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Avi Kivity Subject: Re: [RFC] need to improve slot creation/destruction? -- Re: [RFC][PATCH] srcu: Implement call_srcu() Date: Thu, 09 Feb 2012 16:24:17 +0200 Message-ID: <4F33D711.6020104@redhat.com> References: <1328016724.2446.229.camel@twins> <4F27F0E6.1040309@redhat.com> <1328017807.2446.230.camel@twins> <20120131222447.GH2391@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1328091749.2760.34.camel@laptop> <4F29178A.1090306@redhat.com> <4F2918D5.4050104@redhat.com> <20120201135020.GB18998@amt.cnet> <20120209004320.5772daa0472aef4700dab1b6@gmail.com> <4F33D6C9.2070403@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: mtosatti@redhat.com, kvm@vger.kernel.org To: Takuya Yoshikawa Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:10894 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757397Ab2BIOYU (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Feb 2012 09:24:20 -0500 In-Reply-To: <4F33D6C9.2070403@redhat.com> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 02/09/2012 04:23 PM, Avi Kivity wrote: > > BTW do we really need fast slot creation/destruction? > > Not really, but it's good to have infrastructure that copes with > different workloads. If the patches keep the code simple I think it's a > good thing to have. To qualify - taking several tens of milliseconds is out of the question as some workloads grind to a halt. But it doesn't need to be incredibly fast. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function