Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v10 6/7] vmx: VT-d posted-interrupt core logic handling

["Wu, Feng" <feng.wu@xxxxxxxxx>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dario Faggioli [mailto:dario.faggioli@xxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 20, 2016 9:31 PM
> To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>; Wu, Feng <feng.wu@xxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>; George Dunlap
> <george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Tian, Kevin <kevin.tian@xxxxxxxxx>; xen-
> devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; Keir Fraser <keir@xxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 6/7] vmx: VT-d posted-interrupt core logic handling
> 
> On Wed, 2016-01-20 at 04:35 -0700, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > > > > On 20.01.16 at 12:20, <feng.wu@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Then you didn't understand: The question isn't this path, but the
> > > > path where the hook gets called if non-NULL (and hence the
> > > > possibility to avoid such needless calls).
> > >
> > > I understand you mean the overhead happens when the hooks
> > > is called. My point is the hook is not called in a critical path,
> > > so I doubt
> > > whether it worth doing so to make the logic complex.
> >
> > Are you sure scheduling code is not a critical path?
> >
> TBH, I like Jan's point... It's always good to make all we can to avoid
> calling the hook, if unnecessary.
> 
> Does it really complicates things a lot? Feng, can you give it a try?

Sure, I will try it and discuss with your guys if I meet some issues in
future.

Thanks,
Feng

> 
> Regards,
> Dario
> --
> <<This happens because I choose it to happen!>> (Raistlin Majere)
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> Dario Faggioli, Ph.D, http://about.me/dario.faggioli
> Senior Software Engineer, Citrix Systems R&D Ltd., Cambridge (UK)

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel