From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Avi Kivity Subject: Re: [patch 0/4] move irq protection role to separate lock v2 Date: Thu, 21 May 2009 18:02:28 +0300 Message-ID: <4A156D04.5020405@redhat.com> References: <4A1413C3.4020606@redhat.com> <20090520184841.954066003@localhost.localdomain> <20090521045015.GA1104@amt.cnet> <200905210855.53470.borntrae@de.ibm.com> <4A150241.8070408@redhat.com> <20090521143203.GA3358@amt.cnet> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Christian_Borntr=E4ger?= , Christian Ehrhardt , Carsten Otte , kvm@vger.kernel.org, Christian Borntraeger To: Marcelo Tosatti Return-path: Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:44437 "EHLO mx2.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753730AbZEUPEb (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 May 2009 11:04:31 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20090521143203.GA3358@amt.cnet> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Marcelo Tosatti wrote: >> x86 actually shares the same problem. KVM_IRQ_LINE interrupts may >> arrive at any vcpu. Furthermore, with irqfd interrupts may be injected >> from userspace (the vm process or other processes) or from the kernel >> (assigned device, kernel virtio-net device). So we have the same >> motivation to drop this lock and replace it by rcu for the fast paths. >> > > OK, will use the lock to serialize individual ioctl commands that are > not performance sensitive and need serialization. > Locks should protect data, not operations. Something named ioctl_lock indicates something is wrong. > Any objection to v2 of the irq_lock patch? > Haven't done a detailed review yet, sorry. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function