Re: [PATCH 9/11] Panic delay fix

[Dmitry Torokhov]

On 2/7/07, Rusty Russell <rusty@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 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.
>
> Changing udelay to "hardware_udelay" or something all over the kernel
> would have delayed the paravirt_ops merge by an infinite amount 8)

However I am not really fond of idea of adding constructs like this
all over the code:

#define USE_REAL_TIME_DELAY_I_REALLY_MEAN_IT_THIS_TIME_I_SWEAR

as the time passes... Drivers should be blissfully ignorant of being
run on virtual hardware.

--
Dmitry
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/