![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: > > The comment only talks about disabling interrupts for lazy_mmu, but this > seems to do it for lazy_cpu as well. Is that OK? What happens if > someone wants to change interrupt states under lazy_cpu; I can't think > of an inherent reason why that wouldn't be allowed (though I don't think > it happens now). > Well, lazy cpu is used only for context switch. Changing interrupt states won't happen there. > This kind of logic is a bit clunky anyway; would it be better to simply > have separate enable/disable functions? Or at least separate functions > per mode? > I want to do a cleaner fix for 2.6.22; this is pretty clunky, agree. But it is still better to have fewer paravirt-ops. Perhaps lazy_enter / flush would be more semantically useful. Zach - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2007-03-31 10:23 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||