From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756352AbbAHMcU (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Jan 2015 07:32:20 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:51669 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753837AbbAHMcS (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Jan 2015 07:32:18 -0500 Message-ID: <54AE78C9.9010308@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2015 13:32:09 +0100 From: Paolo Bonzini User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Andrej Manduch , Nicholas Krause , gleb@kernel.org CC: x86@kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCHv2] arch:x86:kvm:Add function for setting pending timer on virtual cpu in x86.c References: <1420167918-2190-1-git-send-email-xerofoify@gmail.com> <54AE709B.2040605@redhat.com> <54AE74F2.7050700@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <54AE74F2.7050700@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 08/01/2015 13:15, Andrej Manduch wrote: >>> >> - /* FIXME: this code should not know anything about vcpus */ > I don't want to sounds like I'm nitpicking. But I need to ask. Why is > this comment removed? Because the real point of the comment was that the code should not know anything about VCPU requests. But it's okay to call a function to tell the VCPU "we want you to call us back at kvm_inject_apic_timer_irqs". Paolo >>> >> - kvm_make_request(KVM_REQ_PENDING_TIMER, vcpu); >>> >> + kvm_set_pending_timer(vcpu);