From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Avi Kivity Subject: Re: [KVM PATCH v7 0/5] irqfd fixes and enhancements Date: Wed, 01 Jul 2009 11:53:26 +0300 Message-ID: <4A4B2406.2020901@redhat.com> References: <20090629181954.1886.20225.stgit@dev.haskins.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mst@redhat.com, davidel@xmailserver.org To: Gregory Haskins Return-path: Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:55621 "EHLO mx2.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753986AbZGAIvj (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Jul 2009 04:51:39 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20090629181954.1886.20225.stgit@dev.haskins.net> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 06/29/2009 09:28 PM, Gregory Haskins wrote: > (Applies to kvm.git/master:4631e094) > > The following is the latest attempt to fix the races in irqfd/eventfd, as > well as restore DEASSIGN support. For more details, please read the patch > headers. I've restored the slow-work variant of the logic as a separate > patch (5/5) so we can get a better idea of the true difference between > the workqueue approach and the slow-work style. I am personally in favor > of the slow-work approach since it doesnt require a mostly-idle+dedicated > thread to hang around. But that is just me. 5/5 can be ignored, folded > in to 3/5+4/5 as appropriate, or merged as is per the whim of Avi et. al. > I think a good compromise would be to create the workqueue when the first VM is launched. > As always, this series has been tested against the kvm-eventfd unit test > with both 5/5 applied and unapplied, and everything appears to be > functioning properly. You can download this test here: > > ftp://ftp.novell.com/dev/ghaskins/kvm-eventfd.tar.bz2 > > I've included version 4 of Davide's eventfd patch (ported to kvm.git) so > that its a complete reviewable series. Note, however, that there may be > later versions of his patch to consider for merging, so we should > coordinate with him. > Davide's patch was merged upstream. Please take a look to make sure this patchset is compatible with what was merged. Patchset looks good to me, but I'd appreciate an ack from Michael (or anyone else who's interested). -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function