From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=32815 helo=eggs.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PTDaJ-00046j-Gn
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 16 Dec 2010 08:09:28 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <lcapitulino@redhat.com>) id 1PTDaI-0004P1-DN
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 16 Dec 2010 08:09:27 -0500
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:23073)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <lcapitulino@redhat.com>) id 1PTDaI-0004Ox-56
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 16 Dec 2010 08:09:26 -0500
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 11:09:17 -0200
From: Luiz Capitulino <lcapitulino@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH v3] qemu, qmp: convert do_inject_nmi()
	to QObject, QError
Message-ID: <20101216110917.646779b7@doriath>
In-Reply-To: <4D0A0B00.3070108@redhat.com>
References: <4D088F27.8000909@cn.fujitsu.com> <20101215150911.14e1693f@doriath>
	<4D08F868.5090100@redhat.com> <20101215152606.078147ad@doriath>
	<m3aak7ylp6.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org>
	<20101215160000.16f85795@doriath> <4D09D5EA.7070000@redhat.com>
	<20101216084815.3ca77188@doriath>
	<m3oc8mj5wm.fsf@blackfin.pond.sub.org>
	<4D0A0B00.3070108@redhat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
Cc: Lai Jiangshan <laijs@cn.fujitsu.com>, aliguori@us.ibm.com, Markus Armbruster <armbru@redhat.com>, kvm@vger.kernel.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org

On Thu, 16 Dec 2010 14:50:08 +0200
Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com> wrote:

> On 12/16/2010 01:47 PM, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> > >
> > >  This has the feature of injecting the nmi in just some cpus, although I'm
> > >  not sure this is going to be desired/useful.
> >
> > Use case for NMI-ing a subset of the CPUs?
> >
> > Heck, use case for anything else but "NMI all"?
> 
> Exactly.

Then I think the to-all-cpus argument is better.