On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 09:36:28AM -0200, Marcelo Tosatti wrote: > On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 10:41:23AM +0800, Liu Ping Fan wrote: > > From: Liu Ping Fan <pingfank@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Currently, vcpu can be destructed only when kvm instance destroyed. > > Change this to vcpu's destruction taken when its refcnt is zero, > > and then vcpu MUST and CAN be destroyed before kvm's destroy. > > > > Signed-off-by: Liu Ping Fan <pingfank@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > arch/x86/kvm/i8254.c | 10 ++++-- > > arch/x86/kvm/i8259.c | 12 +++++-- > > arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c | 7 ++-- > > arch/x86/kvm/x86.c | 54 +++++++++++++++++++---------------- > > include/linux/kvm_host.h | 71 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---- > > virt/kvm/irq_comm.c | 7 +++- > > virt/kvm/kvm_main.c | 62 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------ > > 7 files changed, 170 insertions(+), 53 deletions(-) > > This needs a full audit of paths that access vcpus. See for one example > bsp_vcpu pointer. > Yes. For now we should probably disallow removal of bsp, but we need to get rid of bsp_vcpu at all. It is used only in two places. IOAPIC can be changed to use kvm->bsp_vcpu_id and pic's use looks incorrect anyway. -- 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
