On 10/07/2010 03:24 PM, Rik van Riel wrote:
On 10/07/2010 05:50 AM, Avi Kivity wrote:
+static bool can_do_async_pf(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
+{
+ if (unlikely(!irqchip_in_kernel(vcpu->kvm) ||
+ kvm_event_needs_reinjection(vcpu)))
+ return false;
+
+ return kvm_x86_ops->interrupt_allowed(vcpu);
+}
Strictly speaking, if the cpu can handle NMIs it can take an apf?
Strictly speaking, yes.
However, it may not be able to DO anything with it, since
it won't be able to reschedule the context it's running :)
I was thinking about keeping the watchdog nmi handler responsive.
--
I have a truly marvellous patch that fixes the bug which this
signature is too narrow to contain.
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxx For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>