Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Fri, 04 Nov 2022 09:02:00 +0000
Message-ID: <86edujqeif.wl-maz@kernel.org>
From:   Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
To:     Usama Arif <usama.arif@bytedance.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
        kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-doc@vger.kernel.org,
        virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux@armlinux.org.uk,
        yezengruan@huawei.com, catalin.marinas@arm.com, will@kernel.org,
        steven.price@arm.com, mark.rutland@arm.com, bagasdotme@gmail.com,
        fam.zheng@bytedance.com, liangma@liangbit.com,
        punit.agrawal@bytedance.com
Subject: Re: [v2 0/6] KVM: arm64: implement vcpu_is_preempted check
In-Reply-To: <20221104062105.4119003-1-usama.arif@bytedance.com>
References: <20221104062105.4119003-1-usama.arif@bytedance.com>
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) SEMI-EPG/1.14.7 (Harue)
 FLIM-LB/1.14.9 (=?UTF-8?B?R29qxY0=?=) APEL-LB/10.8 EasyPG/1.0.0 Emacs/27.1
 (aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu) MULE/6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO)
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, 04 Nov 2022 06:20:59 +0000,
Usama Arif <usama.arif@bytedance.com> wrote:
> 
> This patchset adds support for vcpu_is_preempted in arm64, which allows the guest
> to check if a vcpu was scheduled out, which is useful to know incase it was
> holding a lock. vcpu_is_preempted can be used to improve
> performance in locking (see owner_on_cpu usage in mutex_spin_on_owner,
> mutex_can_spin_on_owner, rtmutex_spin_on_owner and osq_lock) and scheduling
> (see available_idle_cpu which is used in several places in kernel/sched/fair.c
> for e.g. in wake_affine to determine which CPU can run soonest):

Please refrain from reposting a series only two days after the initial
one. One week is a minimum, and only if there is enough review
comments to justify a respin (there were no valuable comments so far).

Reposting more often only results in the review process being
exponentially delayed.

Thanks,

	M.

-- 
Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.