On Tue, 30 Jan 2007 14:56:16 -0000
Avi Kivity <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> +static void decache_vcpus_on_cpu(int cpu)
> +{
> + struct kvm *vm;
> + struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu;
> + int i;
> +
> + spin_lock(&kvm_lock);
> + list_for_each_entry(vm, &vm_list, vm_list)
> + for (i = 0; i < KVM_MAX_VCPUS; ++i) {
> + vcpu = &vm->vcpus[i];
> + /*
> + * If the vcpu is locked, then it is running on some
> + * other cpu and therefore it is not cached on the
> + * cpu in question.
> + *
> + * If it's not locked, check the last cpu it executed
> + * on.
> + */
> + if (mutex_trylock(&vcpu->mutex)) {
> + if (vcpu->cpu == cpu) {
> + kvm_arch_ops->vcpu_decache(vcpu);
> + vcpu->cpu = -1;
> + }
> + mutex_unlock(&vcpu->mutex);
> + }
> + }
> + spin_unlock(&kvm_lock);
> +}
The trylock is unpleasing. Perhaps kvm_lock should be a mutex or something?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
