On 04/17/2012 02:18 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote: > On 2012-04-17 12:27, Avi Kivity wrote: > > On 04/16/2012 09:26 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote: > >> We can't run PIT IRQ injection work in the interrupt context of the host > >> timer. This would allow the user to influence the handler complexity by > >> asking for a broadcast to a large number of VCPUs. Therefore, this work > >> was pushed into workqueue context in 9d244caf2e. However, this prevents > >> prioritizing the PIT injection over other task as workqueues share > >> kernel threads. > >> > >> This replaces the workqueue with a kthread worker and gives that thread > >> a name in the format "kvm-pit/<owner-process-pid>". That allows to > >> identify and adjust the kthread priority according to the VM process > >> parameters. > > > > Is this a new ABI? > > Yep. Scripts will use it, maybe even QEMU. Do you want this to appear in > api.txt? You already know the answer. Please make it explicit that the thread is optional. This way, if we gain real-time workqueue support, or eliminate it through some other trick, userspace won't break. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function -- 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
