From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=50818 helo=eggs.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PTDd0-0005Yt-3J
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 16 Dec 2010 08:12:15 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <avi@redhat.com>) id 1PTDcj-0004sG-4H
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 16 Dec 2010 08:11:58 -0500
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:39930)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <avi@redhat.com>) id 1PTDci-0004rv-TN
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 16 Dec 2010 08:11:57 -0500
Message-ID: <4D0A1016.7060408@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 15:11:50 +0200
From: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH v3] qemu, qmp: convert do_inject_nmi()
	to QObject, QError
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>
	<20101216110917.646779b7@doriath>
In-Reply-To: <20101216110917.646779b7@doriath>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
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: Luiz Capitulino <lcapitulino@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 12/16/2010 03:09 PM, Luiz Capitulino wrote:
> 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.

Why have an argument at all?  Always nmi to all cpus.

-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function