On Thu, 2012-11-08 at 13:33 +0100, Torvald Riegel wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-11-07 at 15:01 -0800, Richard Henderson wrote:
> > I wrote the second of these patches first, and I'm uncertain about the
> > desirability of the first of the patches.
> >
> > While working on the uninstrumented code path bulk
On Wed, 2012-11-07 at 15:08 -0800, Andi Kleen wrote:
> Richard Henderson writes:
> >
> > Is it ever likely that we'd choose an uninstrumented path for a
> > nested transaction, given that we're already executing the instrumented
> > path for an outer transaction?
>
> I don't see why not. A small
On Wed, 2012-11-07 at 15:01 -0800, Richard Henderson wrote:
> I wrote the second of these patches first, and I'm uncertain about the
> desirability of the first of the patches.
>
> While working on the uninstrumented code path bulk patch, I noticed that
> nested transactions within the copy of the
Richard Henderson writes:
>
> Is it ever likely that we'd choose an uninstrumented path for a
> nested transaction, given that we're already executing the instrumented
> path for an outer transaction?
I don't see why not. A small inner transaction may well succeed
in HTM, even if the big outer o
On 11/07/2012 03:01 PM, Richard Henderson wrote:
> Thoughts?
Now with 100% more patches per mail!
r~
>From 6e97eb1f7086b4392545cc73254037cd3ff09fe6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Richard Henderson
Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2012 14:32:21 -0800
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] tm: Handle nested transactions in
ipa_
I wrote the second of these patches first, and I'm uncertain about the
desirability of the first of the patches.
While working on the uninstrumented code path bulk patch, I noticed that
nested transactions within the copy of the outermost transaction were
not being processed for an uninstrumented
