From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Avi Kivity Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] KVM: Introduce a callback routine for IOAPIC ack handling Date: Thu, 10 Jul 2008 16:57:44 +0300 Message-ID: <48761558.3070703@qumranet.com> References: <1214571305-20701-1-git-send-email-amit.shah@qumranet.com> <1214571305-20701-2-git-send-email-amit.shah@qumranet.com> <1214571305-20701-3-git-send-email-amit.shah@qumranet.com> <4871EB36.5030003@qumranet.com> <1215513283.31546.133.camel@cluwyn.haifa.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1215513283.31546.133.camel@cluwyn.haifa.ibm.com> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Ben-Ami Yassour Cc: Amit Shah , kvm@vger.kernel.org, Muli Ben-Yehuda , allen.m.kay@intel.com, chrisw@redhat.com, weidong.han@intel.com, virtualization@lists.osdl.org List-Id: virtualization@lists.linuxfoundation.org Ben-Ami Yassour wrote: > On Mon, 2008-07-07 at 13:08 +0300, Avi Kivity wrote: > >> Amit Shah wrote: >> >>> This will be useful for acking irqs of assigned devices >>> >>> >>> >> And also for improving time drift tracking. >> >> Please make this more generic by having a list of callbacks. There >> could also be just one list, rather than one for the ioapic and one for >> the pic as implemented now. >> >> It may also make sense to filter the irq number before calling the >> callback rather than relying on the callback to ignore uninteresting irqs. >> >> > Avi, > > Did you mean something like the patch below? > I did, and have something very similar queued. > How should we protect list accesses, should it be a new lock or an existing one? > > kvm->lock for now. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function