Re: [KVM PATCH v9 2/2] KVM: add iosignalfd support

[Avi Kivity]

On 07/07/2009 03:51 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > Seriously, why add artificial limitations?
> > > IMO, addr=0,len=1 and addr=0,len=2 should not conflict.
> > >
> > >
> > >        
> > They should not conflict, but a two byte write need not hit a one byte
> > registration.
> >      
>
> Yes. That's exactly what I'm saying. I think it should be possible to
> create 2 fds:
>
> addr = 0
> len = 1
> addr = 0
> len = 2
> and at most one will ever trigger.
>
> But current code will not let you create the second one.
>    

I agree then.  Good catch.

--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function

--
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/