[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20170913200824.28067-4-dave@stgolabs.net>
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2017 13:08:20 -0700
From: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>
To: mingo@...nel.org, peterz@...radead.org, pbonzini@...hat.com
Cc: npiggin@...il.com, paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, dave@...olabs.net,
Davidlohr Bueso <dbueso@...e.de>
Subject: [PATCH 3/7] kvm,lapic: Justify use of swait_activate()
A comment might serve future readers.
Signed-off-by: Davidlohr Bueso <dbueso@...e.de>
---
arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c | 4 ++++
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c b/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c
index aaf10b6f5380..69c5612be786 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/lapic.c
@@ -1324,6 +1324,10 @@ static void apic_timer_expired(struct kvm_lapic *apic)
atomic_inc(&apic->lapic_timer.pending);
kvm_set_pending_timer(vcpu);
+ /*
+ * For x86, the atomic_inc() is serialized, thus
+ * using swait_active() is safe.
+ */
if (swait_active(q))
swake_up(q);
--
2.12.0
Powered by blists - more mailing lists