From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Avi Kivity Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: KVM call agenda for Feb 9 Date: Tue, 09 Feb 2010 17:32:22 +0200 Message-ID: <4B718006.6090900@redhat.com> References: <20100209012851.GJ25751@x200.localdomain> <4B710714.1020109@redhat.com> <02FDE8B6-CCC9-4EA5-B7EB-6EFC6497C268@suse.de> <4B712249.4020703@web.de> <4B716EC7.1010900@codemonkey.ws> <4B717361.3000307@redhat.com> <4B717A75.3010300@codemonkey.ws> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Jan Kiszka , Alexander Graf , Chris Wright , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org To: Anthony Liguori Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:52936 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754378Ab0BIPca (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Feb 2010 10:32:30 -0500 In-Reply-To: <4B717A75.3010300@codemonkey.ws> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 02/09/2010 05:08 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote: >> I'm not saying we should push hpet into the kernel to save userspace >> coding effort; there should be an independent reason to do this. But >> I don't think threading qemu is going to be anything near easy. > > > It's certainly not easy but I don't think it's impossibly hard. Not impossible - see for example the kernel, the BKL should be removed RSN. But yes, I think RCU will simplify things for us, and we have all of that experience to learn from. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function