Re: [PATCH] Allow preemption during lazy mmu updates

[Avi Kivity]

Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-04-08 at 16:54 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>   
> > >  kernel/sched.c                     |    2 -
> > >       
> > Needs the ack of ... oh, never mind - this one is fine i guess ;-)
> >     
>
> Ah, about that. This new preemption hook has slightly different
> requirements than the current preempt-notifiers have (hence the new
> hook), I was wondering if KVM (afaik currently the only preempt-notifier
> consumer) could live with these requirements.
>
> That is, could these be merged?
>   

What are the slight differences in requirements?

KVM wants to run in non-preemptible, interrupts-enabled context.


--
Do not meddle in the internals of kernels, for they are subtle and quick to panic.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/