On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 12:03:30PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote: > Marcelo Tosatti wrote: >> On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 11:26:19AM -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote: >> >>> On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 01:45:52PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote: >>> >>>> Marcelo Tosatti wrote: >>>> >>>>> From: Yaniv Kamay <yaniv@xxxxxxxxxxxx> >>>>> >>>>> Stop cpus before devices when stopping the VM, start cpus after devices >>>>> when starting VM. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> Why is this needed? >>>> >>> A vcpu could access a stopped device otherwise. >> >> Actually on vm_stop its safe because the order happens to be correct, >> but on vm_start its the other way around (vcpus start first, and they >> should be started last). >> > > But, we are holding qemu_mutex. How can vcpus access the devices? You're right, they can't. But its not bad to make it explicit, instead of relying on the locking behaviour? -- 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
