WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
   
 
 
Xen 
 
Home Products Support Community News
 
   
 

xen-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] [xen-4.1-testing test] 9805: regressions - FAIL

To: Keir Fraser <keir@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [xen-4.1-testing test] 9805: regressions - FAIL
From: Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2011 10:43:01 +0000
Cc: "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Stefano Stabellini <Stefano.Stabellini@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Stefan Bader <stefan.bader@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Jan, Beulich <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Thu, 17 Nov 2011 02:42:51 -0800
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <CAEA944D.343E5%keir@xxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <CAEA944D.343E5%keir@xxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Alpine 2.00 (DEB 1167 2008-08-23)
On Thu, 17 Nov 2011, Keir Fraser wrote:
> On 17/11/2011 10:28, "Stefan Bader" <stefan.bader@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> >>> Hm, yes we should. I am pretty sure I hit that code path often enough,
> >>> Wonder
> >>> why I never saw any dead lock there...
> >> 
> >> Perhaps your dom0 kernel doesn't register a pirq_eoi_map.
> >> 
> > Would be the only explanation. And quite possible. Heck, I would need to 
> > know
> > what that is used for anyway. :/ The kernel is 3.0 based the interrupt I was
> > looking at just was a normal apic emulated through events one...
> 
> Our automated tests still use 2.6.32. It wouldn't surprise me if upstream
> Linux 3 doesn't have the pirq_eoi_map stuff; it's an optimisation rather
> than core absolutely-required functionality.
> 
> It's the dom0 PV kernel that matters in this case by the way, not the kernel
> that you are running in HVM mode as a domU.

In any case considering that the PHYSDEVOP_eoi case wasn't protected by
a lock before this patch, we could just add the spinlock around the new
code only, to protect accesses to the pirq_emuirq array.

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel