On Fri, May 08, 2009 at 02:25:11AM -0300, Glauber Costa wrote:
> On Wed, May 06, 2009 at 01:51:04PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
> > Gleb Natapov wrote:
> >> On Tue, May 05, 2009 at 02:40:11PM -0400, Glauber Costa wrote:
> >>
> >>> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> >>> index 8e680c3..a49d07b 100644
> >>> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> >>> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> >>> @@ -510,6 +510,8 @@ struct kvm_x86_ops {
> >>> void (*run)(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm_run *run);
> >>> int (*handle_exit)(struct kvm_run *run, struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
> >>> void (*skip_emulated_instruction)(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
> >>> + void (*set_interrupt_shadow)(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, int mask);
> >>>
> >> There is .drop_interrupt_shadow() callback. The patch should remove it and
> >> replace its use by set_interrupt_shadow().
> >>
> >
> > That would be [PATCH 1/2].
> [PATCH 2/2]. Otherwise we will break bisectability, as the pure removal of this
> function would lead us to a non-functioning kernel for no reason.
>
> Avi: if this patch is okay, please apply. I'll send another one later that replaces
> the existing .drop_interrupt_shadow by the (then) in tree set_interrupt_shadow.
>
It is not always easy to understand what Avi means :) but my
interpretation was that patch 1/2 should replace drop_interrupt_shadow()
with set_interrupt_shadow() and 2/2 should be only emulation changes.
--
Gleb.
--
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
