From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Avi Kivity Subject: Re: RFC: qemu acpi hotplug Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2008 10:14:12 +0200 Message-ID: <4791B154.6060209@qumranet.com> References: <478E7345.2050402@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: kvm-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org, Marcelo Tosatti To: Glauber de Oliveira Costa Return-path: In-Reply-To: <478E7345.2050402-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@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 Glauber de Oliveira Costa wrote: > When it's more close to inclusion, I'd also post it to main qemu list. > But right now, I'm just aiming at a first round around this draft. > > The attached patch is enough to make the notifications DEVICE_CHECK > and EJECT reach the kernel. As far as I understand, some userspace > black magic that keeps changing its scroll is needed to really put the > processors logically off/on after the notify (acpi code itself will > never call cpu_up/down) > > Just let me tell you what you think. You aren't the only hypervisor developer to encounter this: http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/linux/kernel/866461?do=post_view_threaded The patch looks good. One thing we might change is to use just one gpe as a "something processor related has changed" and look up some other pio word to see exactly what, that may be simpler with larger numbers of processors (maybe). -- Any sufficiently difficult bug is indistinguishable from a feature. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/