Linux Virtualization - Apr 2014 - [PATCH v9 05/19] qspinlock: Optimize for smaller NR_CPUS

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 at lists.xenproject.org next time you post so that David and
Boris
> can take a peek at it).
I will cc xen-devel at 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

On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 01:43:58PM -0400, Waiman Long
wrote:
> 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 at lists.xenproject.org next time you post so that David and
Boris
> >can take a peek at it).
> 
> I will cc xen-devel at 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.
You just push your local branch. It should look like a normal
Linux tree with your commits on top.
> 
> -Longman

On 04/23/2014 01:55 PM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 01:43:58PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
>> 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 at lists.xenproject.org next time you post so that David
and Boris
>>> can take a peek at it).
>> I will cc xen-devel at 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.
> You just push your local branch. It should look like a normal
> Linux tree with your commits on top.
I will try that with my next version.

-Longman