[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170217145920.GA28391@potion>
Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2017 15:59:21 +0100
From: Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...hat.com>
To: Andrew Jones <drjones@...hat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>,
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>,
Cornelia Huck <cornelia.huck@...ibm.com>,
James Hogan <james.hogan@...tec.com>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...abs.org>,
Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] KVM: add kvm_request_pending
2017-02-17 10:51+0100, Andrew Jones:
> On Thu, Feb 16, 2017 at 05:04:49PM +0100, Radim Krčmář wrote:
> ...
>> diff --git a/include/linux/kvm_host.h b/include/linux/kvm_host.h
>> index 2cc438685af8..563cf964dc5c 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/kvm_host.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/kvm_host.h
>> @@ -1101,6 +1101,11 @@ static inline int kvm_ioeventfd(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_ioeventfd *args)
>> * should contain kvm_vcpu_kick().
>> */
>>
>> +static inline bool kvm_request_pending(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>> +{
>> + return vcpu->requests;
>
> How about wrapping this with READ_ONCE for good measure?
Sounds good; I don't think that callers would want stale values, thanks.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists