From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/6] kvm: Extend irqfd to support level interrupts
Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2012 16:04:18 -0600
Message-ID: <1340834658.1207.261.camel@bling.home>
References: <20120627044758.23698.249.stgit@bling.home>
	 <20120627050937.23698.68442.stgit@bling.home>
	 <20120627152624.GC21393@redhat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: avi@redhat.com, kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	jan.kiszka@siemens.com
To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <20120627152624.GC21393@redhat.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org

On Wed, 2012-06-27 at 18:26 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 11:09:46PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
> > @@ -71,6 +130,14 @@ irqfd_inject(struct work_struct *work)
> >  	kvm_set_irq(kvm, KVM_USERSPACE_IRQ_SOURCE_ID, irqfd->gsi, 0);
> >  }
> >  
> > +static void
> > +irqfd_inject_level(struct work_struct *work)
> > +{
> > +	struct _irqfd *irqfd = container_of(work, struct _irqfd, inject);
> > +
> > +	kvm_set_irq(irqfd->kvm, irqfd->source->id, irqfd->gsi, 1);
> > +}
> > +
> >  /*
> >   * Race-free decouple logic (ordering is critical)
> >   */
> 
> 
> Why is it safe to ignore return value here?
> needs a comment.

Well, it seems like you and Gleb came to the conclusion that it's safe,
but I can really follow from the list thread.  Can you explain and I'll
add a comment?  Thanks,

Alex