>>> On Mon, Mar 19, 2007 at 10:03 AM, in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Avi Kivity <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Avi Kivity wrote: >> Gregory Haskins wrote: >>> Hi Avi, >>> You make good points. I will convert to a nest lock design and >>> resubmit. Should I use two mutexes, or a mutex and spinlock? >>> >>> Also, do you have any suggestions on the signum I should use to IPI >>> the running guest? Should I use one of the normal signals (SIGUSR) >>> or should I start a block of defined signals in the RT range (>32)? >>> >> >> For a short term solution, where the apic is in userspace, we can just >> say ipi == signal, and not require any locking. Qemu will catch the >> signal and call the appropriate apic function. The signal number >> should be set from userspace. >> > > Note that as long as the apic code is in userspace, the sending side is > also in userspace, so all the IPI related stuff doesn't touch the kernel.
I see. So really the entire approach I took (against the kernel code) is wrong, and I should focus on the QEMU side? -Greg ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ kvm-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kvm-devel
