[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090508052511.GC5953@poweredge.glommer>
Date: Fri, 8 May 2009 02:25:11 -0300
From: Glauber Costa <glommer@...hat.com>
To: Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
Cc: Gleb Natapov <gleb@...hat.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] deal with interrupt shadow state for emulated
instruction
On Wed, May 06, 2009 at 01:51:04PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
> Gleb Natapov wrote:
>> On Tue, May 05, 2009 at 02:40:11PM -0400, Glauber Costa wrote:
>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h
>>> index 8e680c3..a49d07b 100644
>>> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h
>>> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h
>>> @@ -510,6 +510,8 @@ struct kvm_x86_ops {
>>> void (*run)(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm_run *run);
>>> int (*handle_exit)(struct kvm_run *run, struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
>>> void (*skip_emulated_instruction)(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
>>> + void (*set_interrupt_shadow)(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, int mask);
>>>
>> There is .drop_interrupt_shadow() callback. The patch should remove it and
>> replace its use by set_interrupt_shadow().
>>
>
> That would be [PATCH 1/2].
[PATCH 2/2]. Otherwise we will break bisectability, as the pure removal of this
function would lead us to a non-functioning kernel for no reason.
Avi: if this patch is okay, please apply. I'll send another one later that replaces
the existing .drop_interrupt_shadow by the (then) in tree set_interrupt_shadow.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists