From: Christian Ehrhardt <ehrhardt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
Cc: Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, borntraeger@de.ibm.com, cotte@de.ibm.com,
heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com, schwidefsky@de.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] kvm-s390: infrastructure to kick vcpus out of guest state
Date: Thu, 28 May 2009 15:11:08 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4A1E8D6C.2020901@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4A1E4E6F.8050402@redhat.com>
Avi Kivity wrote:
> Christian Ehrhardt wrote:
>>> So you _need_ a mechanism to kick all vcpus out of guest mode?
>>>
>> I have a mechanism to kick a vcpu, and I use it. Due to the fact that
>> smp_call_* don't work as kick for us the kick is an arch specific
>> function.
>> I hop ethat clarified this part :-)
>>
>
> You could still use make_all_vcpus_request(), just change
> smp_call_function_many() to your own kicker.
>
Yes and I like this idea for further unification, but I don't want it
mixed too much into the patches in discussion atm.
Because on one hand I have some problems giving my arch specific kick a
behaviour like "return when the guest WAS kicked" and on the other hand
I would e.g. also need to streamline the check in make_all_vcpus_request
which cpu is running etc because vcpu->cpu stays -1 all the time on s390
(never used).
Therefore I would unify things step by step and this way allow single
task to went off my task pile here :-)
--
Grüsse / regards, Christian Ehrhardt
IBM Linux Technology Center, Open Virtualization
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-05-28 13:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-05-25 11:40 [PATCH 0/3] kvm-s390: revised version of kvm-s390 guest memory handling - v2 ehrhardt
2009-05-25 11:40 ` [PATCH 1/3] kvm-s390: infrastructure to kick vcpus out of guest state ehrhardt
2009-05-25 20:22 ` Marcelo Tosatti
2009-05-26 8:02 ` Christian Ehrhardt
2009-05-28 3:44 ` Marcelo Tosatti
2009-05-28 7:59 ` Christian Ehrhardt
2009-05-28 8:42 ` Avi Kivity
2009-05-28 13:11 ` Christian Ehrhardt [this message]
2009-05-25 11:40 ` [PATCH 2/3] kvm-s390: fix signal handling ehrhardt
2009-05-25 11:40 ` [PATCH] kvm-s390: streamline memslot handling - v2 ehrhardt
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2009-05-20 13:34 [PATCH 0/3] kvm-s390: revised version of kvm-s390 guest memory handling ehrhardt
2009-05-20 13:34 ` [PATCH 1/3] kvm-s390: infrastructure to kick vcpus out of guest state ehrhardt
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=4A1E8D6C.2020901@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=ehrhardt@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=avi@redhat.com \
--cc=borntraeger@de.ibm.com \
--cc=cotte@de.ibm.com \
--cc=heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mtosatti@redhat.com \
--cc=schwidefsky@de.ibm.com \
/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.