On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 04:33:44PM +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 02:57:26PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > > You could of course go fix that instead of mutilating things into > > sort-of functional state. > > Yes, we'd just need to touch all architectures, all for > the sake of UP which almost no one uses. > Basically, we need APIs that explicitly are > for talking to another kernel on a different CPU on > the same SMP system, and implemented identically > between CONFIG_SMP and !CONFIG_SMP on all architectures. > > Do you think this is something of general usefulness, > outside virtio? I'm not aware of any other case, but if there are more parts of virt that need this then I see no problem adding it. That is, virt in general is the only use-case that I can think of, because this really is an artifact of interfacing with an SMP host while running an UP kernel. But I'm really not familiar with virt, so I do not know if there's more sites outside of virtio that could use this. Touching all archs is a tad tedious, but its fairly straight forward. _______________________________________________ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
