|
From: | Greg Bellows |
Subject: | Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 9/9] target-arm: Add WFx instruction trap support |
Date: | Thu, 23 Apr 2015 09:26:50 -0500 |
Yeah, true. It's actually a very bad YIELD point when has_work() is trueOn Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 12:28:43PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 23 April 2015 at 12:24, Edgar E. Iglesias <address@hidden> wrote:
> > Maybe we can consider YIELD instead of NOP when has_work() is true as a WFI
> > is probably a good hint from guests to reschedule QEMU CPUs.
>
> That I'm not convinced about. If we have a pending interrupt then
> our best bet is probably to take it immediately on this CPU, not
> yield to another CPU and take the interrupt when we eventually
> get control back.
for a WFI.
For WFE too I guess, when interrupts are unmasked.
Good point.
Cheers,
Edgar
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |