From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Gleb Natapov <gleb@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv5 1/4] Provide userspace IO exit completion callback.
Date: Sun, 5 Aug 2012 17:49:41 +0300
Message-ID: <20120805144941.GR27579@redhat.com>
References: <1343659101-24877-1-git-send-email-gleb@redhat.com>
 <1343659101-24877-2-git-send-email-gleb@redhat.com>
 <20120802192629.GA28613@amt.cnet>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, avi@redhat.com
To: Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>
Return-path: <kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:49918 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1754459Ab2HEOtm (ORCPT <rfc822;kvm@vger.kernel.org>);
	Sun, 5 Aug 2012 10:49:42 -0400
Received: from int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22])
	by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q75EngvD000882
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK)
	for <kvm@vger.kernel.org>; Sun, 5 Aug 2012 10:49:42 -0400
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20120802192629.GA28613@amt.cnet>
Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <kvm.vger.kernel.org>

On Thu, Aug 02, 2012 at 04:26:29PM -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 30, 2012 at 05:38:18PM +0300, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> >  	int r;
> > @@ -5554,9 +5568,13 @@ int kvm_arch_vcpu_ioctl_run(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm_run *kvm_run)
> >  		}
> >  	}
> >  
> > -	r = complete_mmio(vcpu);
> > -	if (r <= 0)
> > -		goto out;
> > +	if (unlikely(vcpu->arch.complete_userspace_io)) {
> > +		int (*cui)(struct kvm_vcpu *) = vcpu->arch.complete_userspace_io;
> > +		vcpu->arch.complete_userspace_io = NULL;
> > +		r = cui(vcpu);
> > +		if (r <= 0)
> > +			goto out;
> > +	}
> 
> Would it be worthwhile to add BUG/WARN_ONs here checking for
> variables that represent valid mmio/pio, but without
> complete_userspace_io function pointer set? (you do that in 
> the reverse case, inside the complete_userspace_io 
> function pointers).
There are never too much asserts :), But I wouldn't want to resend the
series just for that, so if there are other comments that will require
me to resend the series anyway I'll add asserts too.

--
			Gleb.