On Tuesday 30 December 2008 19:07:52 Avi Kivity wrote: > Sheng Yang wrote: > >>> + mutex_lock(&kvm->gsi_msg_lock); > >> > >> The lock is already taken here? > > > > Um? For gsi_msg_lock? > > Sorry, my mistake. Will have to get used to all those locks. > > Is there a way to avoid the lock? We're starting to complicate things...
Well, one list, one lock... But it's not very performance affect one, so maybe I can try kvm->lock... > > >> This looks very messy. Would be better to have the in-kernel irq > >> structure contain a (*set_level)() callback that can take the > >> appropriate action. > > > > You means this part which would merged with ioapic, or something else? > > At the very least, separated into functions. > > At best, kvm_set_irq() should become generic and just invoke callbacks > supplied by the irqchip (pit, ioapic, msi). OK, I would separate it first. Callback function, a little later... -- regards Yang, Sheng -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
