Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932224AbXBNM3j (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Feb 2007 07:29:39 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932226AbXBNM3j (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Feb 2007 07:29:39 -0500 Received: from gprs189-60.eurotel.cz ([160.218.189.60]:34909 "EHLO amd.ucw.cz" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932224AbXBNM3i (ORCPT ); Wed, 14 Feb 2007 07:29:38 -0500 Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2007 13:26:45 +0100 From: Pavel Machek To: Rusty Russell Cc: Zachary Amsden , Andi Kleen , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Andrew Morton , Jeremy Fitzhardinge , Chris Wright Subject: Re: [PATCH 9/11] Panic delay fix Message-ID: <20070214122645.GE22008@elf.ucw.cz> References: <200702060353.l163rUmj000771@zach-dev.vmware.com> <20070206122729.GC47229@muc.de> <45C8FA2D.6010706@vmware.com> <20070207123552.GD4481@ucw.cz> <1170880572.11736.4.camel@localhost.localdomain> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1170880572.11736.4.camel@localhost.localdomain> X-Warning: Reading this can be dangerous to your mental health. User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11+cvs20060126 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1615 Lines: 36 On Thu 2007-02-08 07:36:12, Rusty Russell wrote: > On Wed, 2007-02-07 at 12:35 +0000, Pavel Machek wrote: > > Ugh, it sounds like paravirt is more b0rken then I thought. It should > > always to the proper delay, then replace those udelays that are not > > needed on virtualized hardware with something else. > > > > Just magically defining udelay into nop is broken. > > We'd have to audit and figure out what udelays are for hardware and > which are not, but the evidence is that the vast majority of them are > for hardware and not needed for virtualization. You did not time to do the full audit, so you just did #define. > Changing udelay to "hardware_udelay" or something all over the kernel > would have delayed the paravirt_ops merge by an infinite amount 8) And here you claim you could not do the right thing, because people would notice you are doing huge search/replace without audit, and would stop you. So you simply hidden it from them :-(. Plus... udelay() should just work under virtualization, right? You get slightly slower kernel, but still working, so the "full audit" is not as hard as you are telling me. Just replace udelay() with hardware_udelay() on places that matter in your workload... Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/