On 20/01/2015 08:54, Wincy Van wrote: > On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 3:34 PM, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> Hence, we can disable local interrupts while delivering nested posted >>> interrupts to make sure >>> we are faster than the destination vcpu. This is a bit tricky but it >>> an avoid that race. I think we >>> do not need to add a spin lock here. RCU does not fit this case, since >>> it will introduce a >>> new race window between the rcu handler and handle_vmptr**. >>> >>> I am wondering that whether there is a better way : ) >> >> Why not just use a spinlock? >> > > Hmm.. it seems that using a spinlock is the best way. > I think we can drop the local_irq_save and use a spinlock instead. > I can send v2 if it is necessary, any more ideas? Yes, please send v2 of this patch only. Paolo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
