From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=47165 helo=eggs.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1P8geb-0002fH-9b
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 20 Oct 2010 17:57:02 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>) id 1P8gea-0007Jp-BK
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 20 Oct 2010 17:57:01 -0400
Received: from mail-fx0-f45.google.com ([209.85.161.45]:52402)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>) id 1P8gea-0007JZ-6M
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 20 Oct 2010 17:57:00 -0400
Received: by fxm9 with SMTP id 9so3408319fxm.4
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Wed, 20 Oct 2010 14:56:59 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: Paolo Bonzini <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4CBF65A7.3090903@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2010 23:56:55 +0200
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <cover.1287596626.git.mtosatti@redhat.com>
	<10ae5833ff9de153c311917d532f3e84e5b00387.1287596626.git.mtosatti@redhat.com>
	<4CBF485C.9060808@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
In-Reply-To: <4CBF485C.9060808@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 08/10] MCE: Relay UCR MCE to guest
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: Anthony Liguori <aliguori@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>

On 10/20/2010 09:51 PM, Anthony Liguori wrote:
> I don't understand why this loop is needed but we specifically wait for
> a signal to get delivered that's either SIG_IPI or SIGBUS. We then check
> whether a SIG_IPI or SIGBUS is pending and loop waiting for signals again.
>
> Shouldn't we be looping on just sigismember(SIGBUS)?

You mean because SIG_IPI is a real-time signal and standard signals are 
delivered first?  OTOH, real-time signals can be queued multiple times 
so it makes sense to loop on SIG_IPI as well.

> BTW, we're no longer respecting timeout because we're not adjusting ts
> after each iteration.

The timeout of qemu_kvm_eat_signal is always zero.

Paolo