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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox