From: Carsten Otte <cotte@de.ibm.com>
To: Avi Kivity <avi-atKUWr5tajBWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>
Cc: carsteno-tA70FqPdS9bQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org,
kvm-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org,
kvm-ppc-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org,
Hollis Blanchard
<hollisb-r/Jw6+rmf7HQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
Subject: Re: [kvm-ppc-devel] [kvm-devel] [PATCH] RFC: Create
Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2007 09:06:31 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <47566A17.3040802@de.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <47555BD2.1010305-atKUWr5tajBWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>
Avi Kivity wrote:
> What about merging kvm_cpu_has_interrupt() into _runnable()?
>
> My feeling is that we can keep it separated.
On s390 there is a difference between has_interrupt and not runnable:
CPUs can be in stopped state, and they can be in enabled wait (enabled
for interrupts, similar to hlt state on x86) or in disabled wait
state. All those states indicate that the CPU is not runnable.
Interrupts on the other hand are typically floating between all
virtual CPUs and can be accepted by running CPUs only (that is either
running, or in enabled wait).
I agree that we should keep it seperated.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is sponsored by: The Future of Linux Business White Paper
from Novell. From the desktop to the data center, Linux is going
mainstream. Let it simplify your IT future.
http://altfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/8857-50307-18918-4
_______________________________________________
kvm-ppc-devel mailing list
kvm-ppc-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kvm-ppc-devel
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Carsten Otte <cotte-tA70FqPdS9bQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
To: Avi Kivity <avi-atKUWr5tajBWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>
Cc: carsteno-tA70FqPdS9bQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org,
kvm-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org,
kvm-ppc-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org,
Hollis Blanchard
<hollisb-r/Jw6+rmf7HQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] RFC: Create kvm_arch_vcpu_runnable() function
Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2007 10:06:31 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <47566A17.3040802@de.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <47555BD2.1010305-atKUWr5tajBWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>
Avi Kivity wrote:
> What about merging kvm_cpu_has_interrupt() into _runnable()?
>
> My feeling is that we can keep it separated.
On s390 there is a difference between has_interrupt and not runnable:
CPUs can be in stopped state, and they can be in enabled wait (enabled
for interrupts, similar to hlt state on x86) or in disabled wait
state. All those states indicate that the CPU is not runnable.
Interrupts on the other hand are typically floating between all
virtual CPUs and can be accepted by running CPUs only (that is either
running, or in enabled wait).
I agree that we should keep it seperated.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is sponsored by: The Future of Linux Business White Paper
from Novell. From the desktop to the data center, Linux is going
mainstream. Let it simplify your IT future.
http://altfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/8857-50307-18918-4
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-12-05 9:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-12-03 22:15 [kvm-ppc-devel] [PATCH] RFC: Create kvm_arch_vcpu_runnable() Hollis Blanchard
2007-12-03 22:15 ` [PATCH] RFC: Create kvm_arch_vcpu_runnable() function Hollis Blanchard
2007-12-04 13:20 ` [kvm-ppc-devel] [kvm-devel] [PATCH] RFC: Create Carsten Otte
2007-12-04 13:20 ` [PATCH] RFC: Create kvm_arch_vcpu_runnable() function Carsten Otte
[not found] ` <47555417.7020103-tA70FqPdS9bQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
2007-12-04 13:53 ` [kvm-ppc-devel] [kvm-devel] [PATCH] RFC: Create Avi Kivity
2007-12-04 13:53 ` [PATCH] RFC: Create kvm_arch_vcpu_runnable() function Avi Kivity
[not found] ` <47555BD2.1010305-atKUWr5tajBWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>
2007-12-05 9:06 ` Carsten Otte [this message]
2007-12-05 9:06 ` Carsten Otte
[not found] ` <47566A17.3040802-tA70FqPdS9bQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
2007-12-05 10:06 ` [kvm-ppc-devel] [kvm-devel] [PATCH] RFC: Create Avi Kivity
2007-12-05 10:06 ` [PATCH] RFC: Create kvm_arch_vcpu_runnable() function Avi Kivity
2007-12-05 10:18 ` [kvm-ppc-devel] [kvm-devel] [PATCH] RFC: Create Avi Kivity
2007-12-05 10:18 ` [PATCH] RFC: Create kvm_arch_vcpu_runnable() function Avi Kivity
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=47566A17.3040802@de.ibm.com \
--to=cotte@de.ibm.com \
--cc=avi-atKUWr5tajBWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org \
--cc=carsteno-tA70FqPdS9bQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=hollisb-r/Jw6+rmf7HQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=kvm-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org \
--cc=kvm-ppc-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.