Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> So conceptually I think the concept makes sense but implementation
> wise I think what is currently present is totally ridiculous.
I tend to agree. For Xen I added smp_ops as an adjunct to paravirt_ops,
which is basically the interface defined in linux/smp.h:
struct smp_ops
{
void (*smp_prepare_boot_cpu)(void);
void (*smp_prepare_cpus)(unsigned max_cpus);
int (*cpu_up)(unsigned cpu);
void (*smp_cpus_done)(unsigned max_cpus);
void (*smp_send_stop)(void);
void (*smp_send_reschedule)(int cpu);
int (*smp_call_function_mask)(cpumask_t mask,
void (*func)(void *info), void *info,
int wait);
};
This is a fairly close match to Xen's requirements. Certainly, anything
APIC-related is useless for us, since there's no APIC emulation going on.
I won't speak for Zach, but his counter-argument is generally along the
lines of "we can just make use of the existing code with a couple of
little hooks near the bottom". But I wonder if the existing genapic
interface can be used (or extended) to cover these cases without having
needing to have APIC-level interfaces in paravirt_ops.
Are you reviewing -mm? That's basically OK, but there's newer stuff in
Andi's patch queue.
J
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
