On Wed, 3 Jun 2009, Gregory Haskins wrote:
>
> Thanks again for the review, Paul. IIUC, you think the design is ok as
> it is.
>
> Davide,
>In light of this, would you like to submit patch 1/2 formally with
> your SOB at your earliest convenience? Or would you prefer that I
> submit it and
Thanks again for the review, Paul. IIUC, you think the design is ok as
it is.
Davide,
In light of this, would you like to submit patch 1/2 formally with
your SOB at your earliest convenience? Or would you prefer that I
submit it and you can simply ack it? Either is fine with me.
-Greg
s
On Tue, Jun 02, 2009 at 09:53:29PM -0400, Gregory Haskins wrote:
> Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 02, 2009 at 02:23:14PM -0400, Gregory Haskins wrote:
> >
> >> Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Tue, Jun 02, 2009 at 11:15:38AM -0400, Gregory Haskins wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 02, 2009 at 02:23:14PM -0400, Gregory Haskins wrote:
>
>> Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, Jun 02, 2009 at 11:15:38AM -0400, Gregory Haskins wrote:
>>>
>>>
Assigning an irqfd object to a kvm object creates a relationship that we
>>>
On Tue, Jun 02, 2009 at 02:23:14PM -0400, Gregory Haskins wrote:
> Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 02, 2009 at 11:15:38AM -0400, Gregory Haskins wrote:
> >
> >> Assigning an irqfd object to a kvm object creates a relationship that we
> >> currently manage by having the kvm oject acquire/
Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 02, 2009 at 11:15:38AM -0400, Gregory Haskins wrote:
>
>> Assigning an irqfd object to a kvm object creates a relationship that we
>> currently manage by having the kvm oject acquire/hold a file* reference to
>> the underlying eventfd. The lifetime of these
On Tue, Jun 02, 2009 at 11:15:38AM -0400, Gregory Haskins wrote:
> Assigning an irqfd object to a kvm object creates a relationship that we
> currently manage by having the kvm oject acquire/hold a file* reference to
> the underlying eventfd. The lifetime of these objects is properly maintained
>
Davide Libenzi wrote:
> On Tue, 2 Jun 2009, Gregory Haskins wrote:
>
>
>> @@ -64,12 +101,28 @@ irqfd_wakeup(wait_queue_t *wait, unsigned mode, int
>> sync, void *key)
>> {
>> struct _irqfd *irqfd = container_of(wait, struct _irqfd, wait);
>>
>> -/*
>> - * The wake_up is called w
On Tue, 2 Jun 2009, Gregory Haskins wrote:
> @@ -64,12 +101,28 @@ irqfd_wakeup(wait_queue_t *wait, unsigned mode, int
> sync, void *key)
> {
> struct _irqfd *irqfd = container_of(wait, struct _irqfd, wait);
>
> - /*
> - * The wake_up is called with interrupts disabled. Therefor
Assigning an irqfd object to a kvm object creates a relationship that we
currently manage by having the kvm oject acquire/hold a file* reference to
the underlying eventfd. The lifetime of these objects is properly maintained
by decoupling the two objects whenever the irqfd is closed or kvm is clos
10 matches
Mail list logo