[lkml]   [2009]   [Jun]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCHv2] kvm: remove in_range and switch to rwsem for iobus
On 06/29/2009 01:06 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>>> 2. if I do it before in_range removal it's a lot of churn:
>>> one of the reasons for code reorg is so that there are less
>>> places to change locking.
>> I don't think you really need to change anything. slots_lock is already
>> taken (except where you modify the list).
> Are you sure about this? I don't understand the code well enough, so
> this reuse of an apparently unrelated lock just makes me nervious. For
> example what about emulate_instruction? It is sometimes called from
> svm/vmx without slot lock ...

vcpu context always has slots lock taken IIRC, except when in guest mode.

It's not an unrelated lock; slots lock locks memory hotplug, we extend
it to lock mmio_bus and io_bus hotplug.

I'd really like to avoid a proliferation of locks.

>> How about this:
>> 1. add slots_lock for write when modifying the list
>> 2. change the api
>> 3. drop kvm->lock
>> ?
> Looks like I will just have to bite the bullet and switch to RCU.

You still need a lock to prevent concurrent modifications to mmio_bus
(but can use kvm->lock for this).

error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function

 \ /
  Last update: 2009-06-29 12:23    [W:0.030 / U:0.056 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site