From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Zachary Amsden Subject: Re: [PATCH] paravirt.h Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 01:44:19 -0700 Message-ID: <44EC1563.90206@vmware.com> References: <1155202505.18420.5.camel@localhost.localdomain> <44DB7596.6010503@goop.org> <1156254965.27114.17.camel@localhost.localdomain> <200608221544.26989.ak@muc.de> <44EB3BF0.3040805@vmware.com> <1156271386.2976.102.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <1156275004.27114.34.camel@localhost.localdomain> <44EB584A.5070505@vmware.com> <44EB5A76.9060402@vmware.com> <44EB7F0C.60402@vmware.com> <1156319788.2829.12.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1156319788.2829.12.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Arjan van de Ven Cc: Andi Kleen , virtualization@lists.osdl.org, Jeremy Fitzhardinge , Andrew Morton , Chris Wright , Linux Kernel Mailing List List-Id: virtualization@lists.linuxfoundation.org Arjan van de Ven wrote: >> Since this code is so rather, um, custom, I was going to reimplement >> stop_machine in the module. >> > > that sounds like a big mistake. I assume you want your VMI module to be > part of mainline for one. > > And this is the sort of thing that if we want to support it, we better > support it inside the main kernel, eg provide an api to modules to use > it, rather than having each module hack their own.... > Yes, after discussion with Rusty, it appears that beefing up stop_machine_run is the right way to go. And it has benefits for non-paravirt code as well, such as allowing plug-in kprobes or oprofile extension modules to be loaded without having to deal with a debug exception or NMI during module load/unload. Thanks, Zach