RE: [Xen-devel] SMP Guest Proposal RFC

[Rik van Riel <riel@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, 1 Apr 2005, Bryan S Rosenburg wrote:

> This is in fact the mechanism described in Uhlig et al.  Its main drawback 
> is that it does nothing to address the problem of user-level lock-holder 
> preemption.

I'm not sure we need that, futexes seem to take care of the
user-level problem pretty well.

Hmmmm, that makes me wonder if we should use something like
futexes (but simpler, since a virtual machine is one address
space) for xenolinux spinlocks...

-- 
"Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place.
Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are,
by definition, not smart enough to debug it." - Brian W. Kernighan

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel