On 06/05/2011 08:19 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
On 05.06.2011, at 18:33, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 06/05/2011 07:30 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Could you elaborate what you mean here? I'm not really following. Are
>> >> you suggesting a new arch-generic interface? (Pardon my ignorance).
>> >
>> > Using KVM_IRQ_LINE everywhere except s390, not just in x86 and ARM.
>>
>> An in-kernel MPIC implementation is coming for PPC, so I don't see any
reason to switch from something that works now.
>
> Right, this is spilled milk.
>
> Does the ppc qemu implementation raise KVM_INTERRUPT solely from the vcpu
thread?
Well, without iothread it used to obviously. Now that we have an iothread, it
calls ioctl(KVM_INTERRUPT) from a separate thread.
That's 100% broken, as api.txt states. Besides consistency, this is to
allow an eventual move to a syscall interface where the vcpu is derived
from current rather than an fd parameter.
The code also doesn't forcefully wake up the vcpu thread, so yes, I think
here's a chance for at least delaying interrupt delivery. Chances are pretty
slim we don't get out of the vcpu thread at all :).
Maybe slim, but still a major bug.
--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
--
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
