qemu-devel.nongnu.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Anthony Liguori <aliguori@us.ibm.com>
To: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>
Cc: Amit Shah <amit.shah@redhat.com>,
	Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
	Peter Crosthwaite <peter.crosthwaite@xilinx.com>,
	qemu-devel@nongnu.org, gson@gson.org
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH] main-loop: Unconditionally unlock iothread
Date: Thu, 04 Apr 2013 13:17:48 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87obdudusz.fsf@codemonkey.ws> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAFEAcA9e=Q9o49H9F+pc_s7SOgx=oZ-ok47NpWSiruSwsoJeyg@mail.gmail.com>

Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org> writes:

> On 4 April 2013 17:59, Anthony Liguori <aliguori@us.ibm.com> wrote:
>> So I think this is a long way of saying:
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Anthony Liguori <aliguori@us.ibm.com>
>
> Any chance we could update the commit message to include
> this more authoritative analysis?

Yes, please do.  I'm also not sure that just always dropping the lock is
the best strategy either.

I think a simple counter with a nice comment that explains why we need
to periodically drop the lock is a better solution as it gives a way to
experiment with the right value to ensure fairness between the threads
without having excessing lock acquisition/release.

Regards,

Anthony Liguori

>
> thanks
> -- PMM

  reply	other threads:[~2013-04-04 18:18 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-04-02  9:04 [Qemu-devel] [RFC PATCH] main-loop: Unconditionally unlock iothread Peter Crosthwaite
2013-04-02 11:11 ` Paolo Bonzini
2013-04-03  2:17   ` Peter Crosthwaite
2013-04-03  6:35     ` Paolo Bonzini
2013-04-03 23:58       ` Peter Crosthwaite
2013-04-04  5:44         ` Paolo Bonzini
2013-04-04 13:49           ` Anthony Liguori
2013-04-04 16:59           ` Anthony Liguori
2013-04-04 17:03             ` Peter Maydell
2013-04-04 18:17               ` Anthony Liguori [this message]
2013-04-04 18:57             ` Paolo Bonzini
2013-04-04 19:54               ` Anthony Liguori
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2013-04-02  8:53 Peter Crosthwaite

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=87obdudusz.fsf@codemonkey.ws \
    --to=aliguori@us.ibm.com \
    --cc=amit.shah@redhat.com \
    --cc=gson@gson.org \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=peter.crosthwaite@xilinx.com \
    --cc=peter.maydell@linaro.org \
    --cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
    /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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).