On 06.09.2010, at 07:46, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 09/06/2010 04:48 AM, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
>> On 09/05/2010 03:18 PM, Avi Kivity wrote:
>>> On 09/03/2010 07:12 AM, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
>>>> It's no need sent IPI to the vcpu which is schedule out
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> @@ -86,6 +86,7 @@ struct kvm_vcpu {
>>>> unsigned long requests;
>>>> unsigned long guest_debug;
>>>> int srcu_idx;
>>>> + bool online;
>>> Why not check for guest_mode instead?
>>>
>> Oh, i forget it...but 'vcpu->guest_mode' is only used in x86 platform,
>> and make_all_cpus_request() is a common function.
>
> We can have a function kvm_vcpu_guest_mode() that is defined differently for
> x86 and the other.
>
>> So, maybe it's better use 'vcpu->online' here, and move 'guest_mode' into
>> 'vcpu->arch' ?
>
> I think guest_mode makes sense for the other archs for reducing IPIs, so
> let's leave it common and recommend that they implement it. Alex, if you're
> ever bored.
What does the bit do? Do we have documentation on it ;)? No seriously, what's
the intent of the field?
Alex
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
