Re: [PATCH 1/2] kvm: use modern cpumask primitives, no cpumask_ton stack

[Avi Kivity]

Rusty Russell wrote:
> > Btw, for the general case, instead of forcing everyone to duplicate, how 
> > about:
> >
> > cpumask_var_t cpus;
> >
> > with_cpumask(cpus) {
> >    ... code to populate cpus
> >    smp_call_function_some(...);
> > } end_with_cpumask(cpus);
> >
> > Where with_cpumask() allocates cpus, and uses a mutex + static fallback 
> > on failure.
> >     
>
> I'd prefer not to hide deadlocks that way :(
>
> I'll re-battle with that code to neaten it.  There are only a few places
> which have these kind of issues.
>
>   

cpuvar_get_maybe_mutex_lock(...);
...
cpuvar_put_maybe_mutex_unlock(...);

?

--
I have a truly marvellous patch that fixes the bug which this
signature is too narrow to contain.

--
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/