lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Jun]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [KVM PATCH v5 0/4] irqfd fixes and enhancements
On 06/28/2009 03:59 PM, Gregory Haskins wrote:
>> I agree that we want POLLHUP support, it's better than holding on to
>> the eventfd. But I think we can make it even cleaner by merging it
>> with deassign. Basically, when we get POLLHUP, we launch a slow_work
>> (or something) that does a regular deassign. That slow_work can grab
>> a ref to the vm, so we don't race with the VM disappearing.
>>
>> But given that the current slow_work does almost nothing, I'm not sure
>> it's worth it.
>>
>
> Yeah, and also note that the algorithm to unhook each side is not quite
> symmetrical. I think I've captured all the common parts (in things like
> irqfd_deactivate(), etc). A minor change in kvm_irqfd_release() could
> technically use a deferred job to release instead of doing it inline,
> but I do not think it buys us very much to do so (as you pointed out,
> the defered part is actually fairly simple). The important parts of the
> protocol lie outside of the work we can do in the work-item anyway.
>

Is the case of deassign vs POLLHUP covered?

Reusing deassign in POLLHUP at least makes it easy to verify that it is.

--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-06-28 15:41    [W:0.185 / U:0.332 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site