[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kvm-ppc
Subject:    Re: [PATCH 0/7] Consolidate vcpu ioctl locking
From:       Carsten Otte <carsteno () de ! ibm ! com>
Date:       2010-05-21 7:35:03
Message-ID: 4BF637A7.3010203 () de ! ibm ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On 15.05.2010 10:26, Alexander Graf wrote:
> On S390, I'm also still sceptical if the implementation we have really works. A \
> device injects an S390_INTERRUPT with its address and on the next vcpu_run, an \
> according interrupt is issued. But what happens if two devices trigger an \
> S390_INTERRUPT before the vcpu_run? We'd have lost an interrupt by then...
We're safe on that: the interrupt info field in both struct kvm (for 
floating interrupts) and struct vcpu (for cpu local interrupts) have 
their own locking and can queue up interrupts.

cheers,
Carsten
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm-ppc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]