[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <50608994.3050004@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2012 18:25:56 +0200
From: Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
CC: Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>,
Srikar <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"Nikunj A. Dadhania" <nikunj@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
KVM <kvm@...r.kernel.org>, Jiannan Ouyang <ouyang@...pitt.edu>,
chegu vinod <chegu_vinod@...com>,
"Andrew M. Theurer" <habanero@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Srivatsa Vaddagiri <srivatsa.vaddagiri@...il.com>,
Gleb Natapov <gleb@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 1/2] kvm: Handle undercommitted guest case in PLE
handler
On 09/24/2012 06:14 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-09-24 at 18:06 +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
>>
>> We would probably need a ->sched_exit() preempt notifier to make this
>> work. Peter, I know how much you love those, would it be acceptable?
>
> Where exactly do you want this? TASK_DEAD? or another exit?
TASK_DEAD of the task that registered the preempt notifier.
The idea is that I want to hold on to the notifier even when exiting to
userspace. Since userspace is under no obligation to call kvm again, I
need a chance to unregister the notifier and otherwise clean up.
Eh, looking at the code, we'll have a ->sched_out() after the state is
set to TASK_DEAD. So all we need to do is examine the state. We'll
need to examine the state anyway to see if we were preempted or blocking.
--
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