[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 2/5] xen/spinlock: We don't need the old structure anymore
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > diff --git a/arch/x86/xen/spinlock.c b/arch/x86/xen/spinlock.c > index 0438b93..71db82c 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/xen/spinlock.c > +++ b/arch/x86/xen/spinlock.c > @@ -81,7 +81,6 @@ static inline void spin_time_accum_blocked(u64 start) > spinlock_stats.time_blocked += delta; > } > #else /* !CONFIG_XEN_DEBUG_FS */ > -#define TIMEOUT (1 << 10) The timeout can be reduced, I think. > static inline void add_stats(enum xen_contention_stat var, u32 val) > { > } > @@ -96,23 +95,6 @@ static inline void spin_time_accum_blocked(u64 start) > } > #endif /* CONFIG_XEN_DEBUG_FS */ > > -/* > - * Size struct xen_spinlock so it's the same as arch_spinlock_t. > - */ > -#if NR_CPUS < 256 > -typedef u8 xen_spinners_t; > -# define inc_spinners(xl) \ > - asm(LOCK_PREFIX " incb %0" : "+m" ((xl)->spinners) : : "memory"); > -# define dec_spinners(xl) \ > - asm(LOCK_PREFIX " decb %0" : "+m" ((xl)->spinners) : : "memory"); > -#else > -typedef u16 xen_spinners_t; > -# define inc_spinners(xl) \ > - asm(LOCK_PREFIX " incw %0" : "+m" ((xl)->spinners) : : "memory"); > -# define dec_spinners(xl) \ > - asm(LOCK_PREFIX " decw %0" : "+m" ((xl)->spinners) : : "memory"); > -#endif > - Spinlocks on the filesystem help ensure consistency; otherwise, there is a chance of a lot of noise coming through. Although NR_CPUS > 256, very few CPUS are doing consistency checks. _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |