From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Avi Kivity Subject: Re: [PATCH] kvm: make vcpu life cycle separated from kvm instance Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2011 11:30:51 +0200 Message-ID: <4EDC8F4B.7040308@redhat.com> References: <4ED212A1.3060300@redhat.com> <1322807192-14147-1-git-send-email-kernelfans@gmail.com> <4EDB4A0D.1000609@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, aliguori@us.ibm.com, gleb@redhat.com, jan.kiszka@web.de To: Liu ping fan Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org On 12/05/2011 07:29 AM, Liu ping fan wrote: > like this, > #define kvm_for_each_vcpu(idx, cnt, vcpup, kvm) \ > for (idx = 0, cnt = 0, vcpup = kvm_get_vcpu(kvm, idx); \ > cnt < atomic_read(&kvm->online_vcpus) && \ > idx < KVM_MAX_VCPUS; \ > idx++, (vcpup == NULL)?:cnt++, vcpup = kvm_get_vcpu(kvm, idx)) \ > if (vcpup == NULL) \ > continue; \ > else > > > A little ugly, but have not thought a better way out :-) > #define kvm_for_each_vcpu(vcpu, it) for (vcpu = kvm_fev_init(&it); vcpu; vcpu = kvm_fev_next(&it, vcpu)) Though that doesn't give a good place for rcu_read_unlock(). -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function