On 06/28/2009 03:59 PM, Gregory Haskins wrote:
I agree that we want POLLHUP support, it's better than holding on to
the eventfd. But I think we can make it even cleaner by merging it
with deassign. Basically, when we get POLLHUP, we launch a slow_work
(or something) that does a regular deassign
Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 06/25/2009 04:59 PM, Gregory Haskins wrote:
>> Gregory Haskins wrote:
>>
>>> (Applies to kvm.git/master:4631e094)
>>>
>>> The following is the latest attempt to fix the races in
>>> irqfd/eventfd, as
>>> well as restore DEASSIGN support. For more details, please read the
On 06/25/2009 04:59 PM, Gregory Haskins wrote:
Gregory Haskins wrote:
(Applies to kvm.git/master:4631e094)
The following is the latest attempt to fix the races in irqfd/eventfd, as
well as restore DEASSIGN support. For more details, please read the patch
headers.
This series has been test
On Thu, 25 Jun 2009, Gregory Haskins wrote:
> So I know we talked yesterday in the review session about whether it was
> actually worth all this complexity to deal with the POLLHUP or if we
> should just revert to the prior "two syscall" model and be done with
> it. Rusty reflected these same sen
Gregory Haskins wrote:
> (Applies to kvm.git/master:4631e094)
>
> The following is the latest attempt to fix the races in irqfd/eventfd, as
> well as restore DEASSIGN support. For more details, please read the patch
> headers.
>
> This series has been tested against the kvm-eventfd unit test, and
(Applies to kvm.git/master:4631e094)
The following is the latest attempt to fix the races in irqfd/eventfd, as
well as restore DEASSIGN support. For more details, please read the patch
headers.
This series has been tested against the kvm-eventfd unit test, and
appears to be functioning properly.
