[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4A40C2E7.9000705@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2009 14:56:23 +0300
From: Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
CC: Gregory Haskins <gregory.haskins@...il.com>,
Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@...ell.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mtosatti@...hat.com,
paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, markmc@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] pass write value to in_range pointers
On 06/23/2009 02:44 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 12:04:06AM -0400, Gregory Haskins wrote:
>
>>>> It will also need to support
>>>> multiple matches.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> What, signal many fds on the same address/value pair?
>>> I see this as a bug. Why is this a good thing to support?
>>> Just increases the chance of leaking this fd.
>>>
>>>
>> I believe Avi asked for this feature specifically, so I will defer to him.
>>
>
> Hmm. That's hard to implement in my model. Avi, can we give up
> this feature? I don't think anyone needs this specifically ...
>
I think we can make do with passing that single eventfd to multiple
consumers. It means their event count reads may return zero, but I
guess we can live with that.
I do want to retain flexibility in how we route events.
--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
--
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