From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Gleb Natapov Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/6] Handle vcpu init/sipi by calling a function on vcpu Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2009 13:16:46 +0300 Message-ID: <20090615101646.GL19508@redhat.com> References: <1244976742-22926-1-git-send-email-gleb@redhat.com> <1244976742-22926-4-git-send-email-gleb@redhat.com> <4A361C7B.2050000@redhat.com> <20090615101137.GK19508@redhat.com> <4A361EFD.6060706@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org To: Avi Kivity Return-path: Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:56519 "EHLO mx2.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751959AbZFOKQp (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Jun 2009 06:16:45 -0400 Received: from int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (int-mx2.corp.redhat.com [172.16.27.26]) by mx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n5FAGmAr010906 for ; Mon, 15 Jun 2009 06:16:48 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4A361EFD.6060706@redhat.com> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 01:14:21PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote: > On 06/15/2009 01:11 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote: >> On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 01:03:39PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote: >> >>> On 06/14/2009 01:52 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote: >>> >>>> Instead of having special case in vcpu event loop. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> I'm a little worried about two vcpus INITing each other simultaneously >>> and deadlocking. INIT/SIPI are async events, the initiator should not >>> wait for them. >>> >>> >> I thought to add on_vcpu_async() for that (if this case is worth warring about). >> > > A generic on_vcpu_async() would need to allocate, that might be expoitable. > Then what about processing events while waiting in on_vcpu()? -- Gleb.