On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 5:30 PM, David Hildenbrand <david@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> +++ b/virt/kvm/arm/arm.c
>> @@ -381,14 +381,11 @@ static void vcpu_power_off(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>> int kvm_arch_vcpu_ioctl_get_mpstate(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
>> struct kvm_mp_state *mp_state)
>> {
>> - vcpu_load(vcpu);
>> -
>> if (vcpu->arch.power_off)
>> mp_state->mp_state = KVM_MP_STATE_STOPPED;
>> else
>> mp_state->mp_state = KVM_MP_STATE_RUNNABLE;
>>
>> - vcpu_put(vcpu);
>> return 0;
>> }
>
> Okay, this also makes sense on other architectures. The important thing
> is only that we hold the vcpu mutex.
>
Yes, but as Paolo said, it's better if architecture maintainers do
that themselves. The risk of me messing things up is way too high
otherwise.
Thanks,
-Christoffer
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-s390" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
