Re: KVM call minutes for Sept 21

["Nadav Har'El" <nyh@math.technion.ac.il>]

On Wed, Sep 22, 2010, Gleb Natapov wrote about "Re: KVM call minutes for Sept 21":
> are reworked even if maintained. Nadav said that he doesn't even know
> how this part of code is working. This is worrying.

Hi,

I just wanted to clarify that reason I don't know exactly how this specific
part of the code works, is because I didn't write it. It doesn't mean that
I think it is so complex that nobody can ever understand it, or that there
is a cause for worry.

The people who wrote this code were convinced (see thread from October 2009,
starting with http://www.mail-archive.com/kvm@vger.kernel.org/msg23898.html)
that their approach was the right thing to do for the IDT_VECTORING_INFO.
Between them being convinced that this is the right way, and you being
convinced that it is the wrong way, I am not (yet) convinced about either
direction. Before I'm quick to simply get rid of this (working) code and
replace it with something else, I need to understand all the little details
involved, and to try to rewrite the code to be more nested-SVM-like and still
work, and to understand how I might test whether it actually works (and
it isn't simply that my workload misses this case altogether). I'll do this.

Nadav.

-- 
Nadav Har'El                        |    Thursday, Sep 23 2010, 15 Tishri 5771
nyh@math.technion.ac.il             |-----------------------------------------
Phone +972-523-790466, ICQ 13349191 |I'm a peripheral visionary: I see into
http://nadav.harel.org.il           |the future, but mostly off to the sides.