Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Wed, 21 Jul 2021 11:06:34 +0900
From:   Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@chromium.org>
To:     Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
Cc:     Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@chromium.org>,
        Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
        Suleiman Souhlal <suleiman@google.com>,
        Joel Fernandes <joelaf@google.com>,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 3/4] arm64: do not use dummy vcpu_is_preempted()
Message-ID: <YPeBKqIS+OTrVKBO@google.com>
References: <20210709043713.887098-1-senozhatsky@chromium.org>
 <20210709043713.887098-4-senozhatsky@chromium.org>
 <875yxf356w.wl-maz@kernel.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <875yxf356w.wl-maz@kernel.org>
Precedence: bulk

On (21/07/12 16:47), Marc Zyngier wrote:
> >  #include <asm/qspinlock.h>
> >  #include <asm/qrwlock.h>
> > +#include <asm/paravirt.h>
> >  
> >  /* See include/linux/spinlock.h */
> >  #define smp_mb__after_spinlock()	smp_mb()
> >  
> > -/*
> > - * Changing this will break osq_lock() thanks to the call inside
> > - * smp_cond_load_relaxed().
> > - *
> > - * See:
> > - * https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200110100612.GC2827@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net
> > - */
> 
> Why are you deleting this? Please explain your reasoning in the commit
> message. It seems to me that it still makes complete sense when
> CONFIG_PARAVIRT is not defined.

You are right. I'll move it to !PARAVIRT #else-branch.