From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Avi Kivity Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5 V5] Avoid soft lockup message when KVM is stopped by host Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 15:01:41 +0200 Message-ID: <4EEF35B5.2090005@redhat.com> References: <1323116344-17911-1-git-send-email-emunson@mgebm.net> <4EDF7B0D.4060001@redhat.com> <20111208151929.GA6301@mgebm.net> <4EE8BBF4.8070108@redhat.com> <20111214175844.GD4075@mgebm.net> <4EE9C274.3030603@redhat.com> <20111215185346.GA2829@mgebm.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: mingo@redhat.com, hpa@zytor.com, arnd@arndb.de, ryanh@linux.vnet.ibm.com, aliguori@us.ibm.com, mtosatti@redhat.com, jeremy.fitzhardinge@citrix.com, levinsasha928@gmail.com, Jan Kiszka , kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org To: Eric B Munson Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20111215185346.GA2829@mgebm.net> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org On 12/15/2011 08:53 PM, Eric B Munson wrote: > I am working on V7 to incorporate the __this_cpu_and suggestion, would you > consider that for inclusion and we can continue discussing the need for the > preemption notification work? Okay. > I think that having a guest complain when the > host is so loaded that the guest watchdog threads can't make any progress is > desirable behavior, it may be the only notification that an admin gets that a > particular host is over loaded. It's the wrong admin, consider a cloud scenario where the host admin and guest admin are different people. Notification on host overload (to initiate migration, say) is a good idea, but it would be a different mechanism. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function