From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
To: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
Cc: davidel@xmailserver.org, gleb@redhat.com, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH-RFC 2/2] eventfd: EFD_STATE flag
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2009 19:57:08 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090803165708.GB3630@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4A770260.5000507@redhat.com>
On Mon, Aug 03, 2009 at 06:29:36PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 08/03/2009 06:14 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>> On Mon, Aug 03, 2009 at 06:09:38PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
>>
>>> On 07/28/2009 08:55 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>>>
>>>> This implements a new EFD_STATE flag for eventfd.
>>>> When set, this flag changes eventfd behaviour in the following way:
>>>> - write simply stores the value written, and is always non-blocking
>>>> - read unblocks when the value written changes, and
>>>> returns the value written
>>>>
>>>> Motivation: we'd like to use eventfd in qemu to pass interrupts from
>>>> (emulated or assigned) devices to guest. For level interrupts, the
>>>> counter supported currently by eventfd is not a good match: we really
>>>> need to set interrupt to a level, typically 0 or 1, and give the guest
>>>> ability to see the last value written.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> @@ -31,37 +31,59 @@ struct eventfd_ctx {
>>>> * issue a wakeup.
>>>> */
>>>> __u64 count;
>>>> + /*
>>>> + * When EF_STATE flag is set, eventfd behaves differently:
>>>> + * value written gets stored in "count", read will copy
>>>> + * "count" to "state".
>>>> + */
>>>> + __u64 state;
>>>> unsigned int flags;
>>>> };
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Why not write the new value into ->count directly?
>>>
>>
>> That's what it says. state is ther to detect that value was changed
>> after last read. Makes sense?
>>
>
> Why not do it at the point of the write?
>
> if (value != ctx->count) {
> ctx->count = value;
> wake_things_up();
> }
What if write comes before read?
> --
> error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-08-03 16:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <cover.1248803500.git.mst@redhat.com>
2009-07-28 17:54 ` [PATCH-RFC 1/2] eventfd: reorganize the code to simplify new flags Michael S. Tsirkin
2009-07-28 17:55 ` [PATCH-RFC 2/2] eventfd: EFD_STATE flag Michael S. Tsirkin
2009-08-03 15:09 ` Avi Kivity
2009-08-03 15:14 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2009-08-03 15:29 ` Avi Kivity
2009-08-03 16:57 ` Michael S. Tsirkin [this message]
2009-08-04 8:53 ` Avi Kivity
2009-08-04 8:54 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2009-08-04 9:17 ` Avi Kivity
2009-08-04 9:17 ` Gleb Natapov
2009-08-04 9:25 ` Avi Kivity
2009-08-04 9:23 ` Gleb Natapov
2009-08-04 9:30 ` Avi Kivity
2009-08-04 9:26 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2009-08-04 10:06 ` Avi Kivity
2009-08-04 9:33 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
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=20090803165708.GB3630@redhat.com \
--to=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=avi@redhat.com \
--cc=davidel@xmailserver.org \
--cc=gleb@redhat.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).