[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2017 18:48:40 +0100
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
To: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
kvm@...r.kernel.org
Cc: kvm-ppc@...r.kernel.org, cohuck@...hat.com,
christoffer.dall@...aro.org, James Hogan <jhogan@...nel.org>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...abs.org>,
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: introduce kvm_arch_vcpu_async_ioctl
On 12/12/2017 18:47, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>> @@ -2547,13 +2547,13 @@ static long kvm_vcpu_ioctl(struct file *filp,
>> #if defined(CONFIG_S390) || defined(CONFIG_PPC) || defined(CONFIG_MIPS)
> can we now also get rid of this ugly define?
Not yet, I'd have to add the function to x86 and ARM, or a dummy inline.
Paolo
>> /*
>> * Special cases: vcpu ioctls that are asynchronous to vcpu execution,
>> - * so vcpu_load() would break it.
>> + * so mutex_lock() would break it.
>> */
>> - if (ioctl == KVM_S390_INTERRUPT || ioctl == KVM_S390_IRQ || ioctl == KVM_INTERRUPT)
>> - return kvm_arch_vcpu_ioctl(filp, ioctl, arg);
>> + r = kvm_arch_vcpu_async_ioctl(filp, ioctl, arg);
>> + if (r != -ENOIOCTLCMD)
>> + return r;
>> #endif
>>
>> -
> unrelated change but the right thing to do :)
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists