Re: [PATCH v9 05/19] qspinlock: Optimize for smaller NR_CPUS

[Waiman Long <waiman.long@hp.com>]

On 04/23/2014 10:56 AM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 10:23:43AM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
>> On 04/18/2014 05:40 PM, Waiman Long wrote:
>>> On 04/18/2014 03:05 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 01:52:50PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
>>>>> I am confused by your notation.
>>>> Nah, I think I was confused :-) Make the 1 _Q_LOCKED_VAL though, as
>>>> that's the proper constant to use.
>>> Everyone gets confused once in a while:-) I have plenty of that myself.
>>>
>>> I will change 1 to _Q_LOCKED_VAL as suggested.
>>>
>>> -Longman
>>
>> The attached patch file contains the additional changes that I had
>> made to qspinlock.c file so far. Please let me know if you or others
>> have any additional feedbacks or changes that will need to go to the
>> next version of the patch series.
>>
>> I am going to take vacation starting from tomorrow and will be back
>> on 5/5 (Mon). So I will not be able to respond to emails within this
>> period.
>>
>> BTW, is there any chance that this patch can be merged to 3.16?
> Um, it needs to have Acks from KVM and Xen maintainers who have not
> done so. Also Peter needs to chime in. (BTW, please CC
> xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org next time you post so that David and Boris
> can take a peek at it).

I will cc xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org when I sent out the next patch.

> I would strongly recommend you put all your patches on github (free git
> service) so that we can test it and poke it at during your vacation
> (and even after).
>

I am not used to setting up a public repo in github. If I create a repo 
there, should I put a snapshot of the whole kernel source tree or just a 
portion of the relevant files as the base? With the later, it won't be 
buildable.

-Longman