From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:35055) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RcdkQ-0005vp-6g for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 19 Dec 2011 08:59:27 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RcdkK-0007O6-VD for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 19 Dec 2011 08:59:22 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:61468) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RcdkK-0007Ni-OZ for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 19 Dec 2011 08:59:16 -0500 Message-ID: <4EEF432A.3030905@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 15:59:06 +0200 From: Avi Kivity MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20111204182541.28487.68163.sendpatchset@oc5400248562.ibm.com> <20111204182622.28487.98656.sendpatchset@oc5400248562.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 3/3] QEMU kvm/i386 : Adding KICK_VCPU capability support in i386 target. List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Alexander Graf Cc: Marcelo Tosatti , kvm@vger.kernel.org, Jan Kiszka , Raghavendra K T , Srivatsa Vaddagiri , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Suzuki Poulose On 12/19/2011 03:54 PM, Alexander Graf wrote: > On 04.12.2011, at 19:26, Raghavendra K T wrote: > > > Extend the KVM Hypervisor to enable KICK_VCPU feature that allows > > a vcpu to kick the halted vcpu to continue with execution in PV ticket > > spinlock. > > > > Signed-off-by: Srivatsa Vaddagiri > > Signed-off-by: Raghavendra K T > > --- > > diff --git a/target-i386/kvm.c b/target-i386/kvm.c > > index 5bfc21f..69bce21 100644 > > --- a/target-i386/kvm.c > > +++ b/target-i386/kvm.c > > @@ -97,6 +97,7 @@ struct kvm_para_features { > > { KVM_CAP_NOP_IO_DELAY, KVM_FEATURE_NOP_IO_DELAY }, > > { KVM_CAP_PV_MMU, KVM_FEATURE_MMU_OP }, > > { KVM_CAP_ASYNC_PF, KVM_FEATURE_ASYNC_PF }, > > + { KVM_CAP_KICK_VCPU, KVM_FEATURE_KICK_VCPU }, > > So this is handled in the kernel? Who enables the feature? Is it always on? Why bother with it in user space at all then? Backwards compatibility -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function