On (Wed) 04 Apr 2012 [12:19:55], Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> disable_cb is just an optimization: it
> can not guarantee that there are no callbacks.
Even then, what's the harm in keeping it? If indeed there's an
attempt to raise an interrupt after the host has been notified, it
will be suppressed.
Also, disable_cb seems to be used elsewhere in the virtio_net.c file,
to suit similar purposes.
Amit
On Thu, May 03, 2012 at 04:29:59PM +0530, Amit Shah wrote:
> On (Wed) 04 Apr 2012 [12:19:55], Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > disable_cb is just an optimization: it
> > can not guarantee that there are no callbacks.
>
> Even then, what's the harm in keeping it? If indeed there's an
> attempt to raise an interrupt after the host has been notified, it
> will be suppressed.
It won't. It's not a guarantee, e.g. with event index on
it does nothing at all.
> Also, disable_cb seems to be used elsewhere in the virtio_net.c file,
> to suit similar purposes.
>
> Amit
Where?