On Thu, Jun 04, 2009 at 04:49:50PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote: > Andi Kleen wrote: > >>There's no good place as it breaks the nice exit handler table. You > >>could put it in vmx_complete_interrupts() next to NMI handling. > >> > > > >I think I came up with a easy cheesy but not too bad solution now that > >should work. It simply remembers the CPU in the vcpu structure and > >schedules back to it. That's fine for this purpose. > > > > We might be able schedule back in a timely manner. Why not hack > vmx_complete_interrupts()? You're still in the critical section so > you're guaranteed no delays or surprises. Yes, have to do that. My original scheme was too risky because the Machine checks have synchronization mechanisms now and preemption has no time limit. I'll hack on it later today, hope fully have a patch tomorrow. -Andi -- ak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx -- Speaking for myself only. -- 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
