From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Carsten Otte Subject: Re: [PATCH] 3/5 Using kvm arch support instead of kvm_x86_ops Date: Wed, 14 Nov 2007 12:53:13 +0100 Message-ID: <473AE1A9.3010501@de.ibm.com> References: <42DFA526FC41B1429CE7279EF83C6BDC94FACA@pdsmsx415.ccr.corp.intel.com> Reply-To: carsteno-tA70FqPdS9bQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: kvm-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org, carsteno-tA70FqPdS9bQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org, Hollis Blanchard , Avi Kivity To: "Zhang, Xiantao" Return-path: In-Reply-To: <42DFA526FC41B1429CE7279EF83C6BDC94FACA-wq7ZOvIWXbMAbVU2wMM1CrfspsVTdybXVpNB7YpNyf8@public.gmane.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: kvm-devel-bounces-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org Errors-To: kvm-devel-bounces-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org I still do strongly agree with the general idea of this patch, and most of the split comes out just right now. However, there is one thing I'd like to pick on: decache_vcpus_on_cpu should be an arch callback, and rather than kvm_arch_vcpu_decache. There's no reason for s390 to grab locks and do the arch callback in a loop. The whole thing is nop for us, thus the whole thing should be a callback. I'd really like to see this changed before the patch gets merged. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/