[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4F9E4BCA.5030604@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2012 11:22:34 +0300
From: Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
To: Gleb Natapov <gleb@...hat.com>
CC: Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>,
Alexander Graf <agraf@...e.de>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...otime.net>, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>,
KVM <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@...citrix.com>,
Virtualization <virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
X86 <x86@...nel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Xen <xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com>,
Sasha Levin <levinsasha928@...il.com>,
Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC V6 1/5] kvm hypervisor : Add a hypercall to KVM hypervisor
to support pv-ticketlocks
On 04/29/2012 04:52 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 29, 2012 at 04:26:21PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
> > On 04/29/2012 04:20 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > > > > This is too similar to kvm_irq_delivery_to_apic(). Why not reuse it. We
> > > > > can use one of reserved delivery modes as PV delivery mode. We will
> > > > > disallow guest to trigger it through apic interface, so this will not be
> > > > > part of ABI and can be changed at will.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > I'm not thrilled about this. Those delivery modes will eventually
> > > > become unreserved. We can have a kvm_lookup_apic_id() that is shared
> > > > among implementations.
> > > >
> > > This is only internal implementation. If they become unreserved we will
> > > use something else.
> > >
> >
> > Yeah, I'm thinking of that time. Why do something temporary and fragile?
> >
> Why is it fragile? Just by unreserving the value Intel will not break
> KVM. Only when KVM will implement apic feature that unreserves the value
> we will have to change internal implementation and use another value,
> but this will be done by the same patch that does unreserving. The
> unreserving may even never happen.
Some remains of that may leak somewhere. Why not add an extra
parameter? Or do something like
kvm_for_each_apic_dest(vcpu, apic_destination) {
...
}
That can be reused in both the apic code and pv kick.
> Meanwhile kvm_irq_delivery_to_apic()
> will likely be optimized to use hash for unicast delivery and unhalt
> hypercall will benefit from it immediately.
Overloading delivery mode is not the only way to achieve sharing.
--
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