[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4C84801F.9060803@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 06 Sep 2010 08:46:07 +0300
From: Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
To: Xiao Guangrong <xiaoguangrong@...fujitsu.com>
CC: Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, KVM <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
Alexander Graf <agraf@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: don't sent IPI if the vcpu is not online
On 09/06/2010 04:48 AM, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> On 09/05/2010 03:18 PM, Avi Kivity wrote:
>> On 09/03/2010 07:12 AM, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
>>> It's no need sent IPI to the vcpu which is schedule out
>>>
>>>
>>> @@ -86,6 +86,7 @@ struct kvm_vcpu {
>>> unsigned long requests;
>>> unsigned long guest_debug;
>>> int srcu_idx;
>>> + bool online;
>> Why not check for guest_mode instead?
>>
> Oh, i forget it...but 'vcpu->guest_mode' is only used in x86 platform,
> and make_all_cpus_request() is a common function.
We can have a function kvm_vcpu_guest_mode() that is defined differently
for x86 and the other.
> So, maybe it's better use 'vcpu->online' here, and move 'guest_mode' into
> 'vcpu->arch' ?
I think guest_mode makes sense for the other archs for reducing IPIs, so
let's leave it common and recommend that they implement it. Alex, if
you're ever bored.
--
I have a truly marvellous patch that fixes the bug which this
signature is too narrow to contain.
--
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