From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754943AbZEQUP3 (ORCPT ); Sun, 17 May 2009 16:15:29 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753733AbZEQUPQ (ORCPT ); Sun, 17 May 2009 16:15:16 -0400 Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:49616 "EHLO mx2.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752721AbZEQUPO (ORCPT ); Sun, 17 May 2009 16:15:14 -0400 Message-ID: <4A10704E.1080301@redhat.com> Date: Sun, 17 May 2009 23:15:10 +0300 From: Avi Kivity User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (X11/20090320) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Gregory Haskins CC: kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [KVM PATCH v2 4/4] kvm: add iosignalfd support References: <20090515162047.26209.93545.stgit@dev.haskins.net> <20090515162823.26209.72294.stgit@dev.haskins.net> In-Reply-To: <20090515162823.26209.72294.stgit@dev.haskins.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Gregory Haskins wrote: > + > +struct _iosignalfd { > Why the underscore? It's unorthodox for a structure. > + u64 cookie; > + u64 addr; > + size_t length; > + struct file *file; > + struct list_head list; > + struct kvm_io_device dev; > +}; > How will that work with multiple identical addresses and different cookies? Will the code iterate over all of them and just fire for one? I guess that's the best way for now. -- Do not meddle in the internals of kernels, for they are subtle and quick to panic.