qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] [virtio-dev] Re: [PATCH v4 3/4] virtio-balloon: VIRTIO_


From: Wei Wang
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [virtio-dev] Re: [PATCH v4 3/4] virtio-balloon: VIRTIO_BALLOON_F_FREE_PAGE_HINT
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2018 10:43:01 +0800
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0

On 03/14/2018 12:49 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
On Wed, Mar 07, 2018 at 08:34:24PM +0800, Wei Wang wrote:

Signed-off-by: Wei Wang <address@hidden>
Signed-off-by: Liang Li <address@hidden>
CC: Michael S. Tsirkin <address@hidden>
CC: Dr. David Alan Gilbert <address@hidden>
CC: Juan Quintela <address@hidden>
I find it suspicious that neither unrealize nor reset
functions have been touched at all.
Are you sure you have thought through scenarious like
hot-unplug or disabling the device by guest?

OK. I think we can call balloon_free_page_stop in unrealize and reset.


+static void *virtio_balloon_poll_free_page_hints(void *opaque)
+{
+    VirtQueueElement *elem;
+    VirtIOBalloon *dev = opaque;
+    VirtQueue *vq = dev->free_page_vq;
+    uint32_t id;
+    size_t size;
What makes it safe to poke at this device from multiple threads?
I think that it would be safer to do it from e.g. BH.


Actually the free_page_optimization thread is the only user of free_page_vq, and there is only one optimization thread each time. Would this be safe enough?

Best,
Wei



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]