From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Suravee Suthikulpanit <Suravee.Suthikulpanit@amd.com>
Subject: Re: [PART1 RFC v3 02/12] KVM: x86: Introducing kvm_x86_ops VM
 init/uninit hooks
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2016 18:47:02 +0700
Message-ID: <56FA6B36.4030607@amd.com>
References: <1458281388-14452-1-git-send-email-Suravee.Suthikulpanit@amd.com>
 <1458281388-14452-3-git-send-email-Suravee.Suthikulpanit@amd.com>
 <56EBD438.5000702@redhat.com> <56FA1240.2000600@amd.com>
 <56FA5737.2090406@redhat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: <kvm@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	<wei@redhat.com>, <sherry.hurwitz@amd.com>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>, <rkrcmar@redhat.com>,
	<joro@8bytes.org>, <bp@alien8.de>, <gleb@kernel.org>,
	<alex.williamson@redhat.com>
Return-path: <kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mail-bn1bon0071.outbound.protection.outlook.com ([157.56.111.71]:31648
	"EHLO na01-bn1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1752365AbcC2Lr1 (ORCPT <rfc822;kvm@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 29 Mar 2016 07:47:27 -0400
In-Reply-To: <56FA5737.2090406@redhat.com>
Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <kvm.vger.kernel.org>

Hi,

On 03/29/2016 05:21 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
>
> On 29/03/2016 07:27, Suravee Suthikulpanit wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Adding function pointers in struct kvm_x86_ops for processor-specific
>>>>> layer to provide hooks for when KVM initialize and un-initialize VM.
>>> This is not the only thing your patch is doing, and the "other" change
>>> definitely needs a lot more explanation about why you did it and how you
>>> audited the code to ensure that it is safe.
>>>
>>> Paolo
>>>
>>
>> Sorry, for not mentioning this earlier. I am moving the
>> kvm_arch_init_vm() call mainly to go after mutex_init(&kvm->slots_lock)
>> since I am calling the x86_set_memory_region() (which uses slots_lock)
>> in the vm_init() hooks (for AVIC initialization).
>>
>> Lemme re-check if this would be safe for other code.
>
> No problem.  In the meanwhile a patch got in ("KVM: fix spin_lock_init
> order on x86") that should help you.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Paolo
>

Right.... that's just what I need :) I'll re-base to the latest tip then.

Thanks,
Suravee