> -----Original Message----- > From: Jan Beulich [mailto:jbeul...@suse.com] > Sent: Monday, February 22, 2016 9:08 PM > To: Wu, Feng <feng...@intel.com> > Cc: Andrew Cooper <andrew.coop...@citrix.com>; Dario Faggioli > <dario.faggi...@citrix.com>; George Dunlap <george.dun...@eu.citrix.com>; > Tian, Kevin <kevin.t...@intel.com>; xen-devel@lists.xen.org; Keir Fraser > <k...@xen.org> > Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 1/2] vmx: VT-d posted-interrupt core logic handling > > > @@ -160,6 +219,14 @@ struct arch_vmx_struct { > > struct page_info *vmwrite_bitmap; > > > > struct page_info *pml_pg; > > + > > + /* > > + * Before it is blocked, vCPU is added to the per-cpu list. > > + * VT-d engine can send wakeup notification event to the > > + * pCPU and wakeup the related vCPU. > > + */ > > + struct list_head pi_blocked_vcpu_list; > > + spinlock_t *pi_block_list_lock; > > }; > > Didn't we settle on making this a struct with a "list" and a "lock" > member?
I don't think so. I will change like this in the next version. > And along those lines the local per-CPU variables added > to xen/arch/x86/hvm/vmx/vmx.c would also benefit from being > put in a struct, making more obvious their close relationship. ' pi_block_list_lock 'in this structure is a pointer to spinlock_t, but the local per-CPU lock is typeof spinlock_t instead of a pointer, so I cannot reuse the struct for the "list" and "lock" member. Do you mean I should create another structure for this two local per-CPU variables? Thanks, Feng _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel