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-ia64-devel

RE: [Xen-ia64-devel][Patch]Add two PAL calls which fixSMPwindowsinstalla

To: "Kouya SHIMURA" <kouya@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Tristan Gingold" <tgingold@xxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: [Xen-ia64-devel][Patch]Add two PAL calls which fixSMPwindowsinstallation crashing bug
From: "Zhang, Xing Z" <xing.z.zhang@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2007 14:05:44 +0800
Cc: xen-ia64-devel <xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Wed, 04 Apr 2007 23:04:25 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <200704050539.l355dU0D006632@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-ia64-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Discussion of the ia64 port of Xen <xen-ia64-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-ia64-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-ia64-devel>, <mailto:xen-ia64-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-ia64-devel>, <mailto:xen-ia64-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
Sender: xen-ia64-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thread-index: Acd3Rpc5MQTrFpc+TzuRzIyRP8fFjwAADGZg
Thread-topic: [Xen-ia64-devel][Patch]Add two PAL calls which fixSMPwindowsinstallation crashing bug
Hi Kouya and Tristan:
        I still have a question. After "11.XEN stops the vcpu", APs wait in 
Xen, how does BSP wake up them again? I don't think BSP will send an IPI to 
them again.
In windows, seems BSP will wait a very short time for AP waking up. Whiles APs 
waked up, they will fall into a loop to wait another times waking up by BSP.
But this time, BSP use memory semaphore to do that but not an IPI. 
En, maybe something I lost, hope your comments.

Good good study,day day up ! ^_^
-Wing(zhang xin)
 
OTC,Intel Corporation

>-----Original Message-----
>From: xen-ia64-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>[mailto:xen-ia64-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Kouya
>SHIMURA
>Sent: 2007年4月5日 13:52
>To: Tristan Gingold
>Cc: xen-ia64-devel
>Subject: Re: [Xen-ia64-devel][Patch]Add two PAL calls which
>fixSMPwindowsinstallation crashing bug
>
>Tristan Gingold writes:
> > > In 10, I don't understand why the special SAL_XEN_SAL_RETURN is
> > > necessary instead of PAL_HALT. The difference is test_and_set_bit() or
> > > set_bit(). I think a vcpu with VCPU_down state never be at this point.
> > > Besides calling vcpu_sleep_no_sync() with VCPU_down state seems to be
> > > harmless.
> > Humm, to be discussed:
> > Although the implementation may be almost the same, I think the semantic is
> > not.
> > After SAL_XEN_SAL_RETURN, the processor can be awaken only by a rendez-vous.
> > Its state is reset.
> >
> > After PAL_HALT, the processor can be awaken by an IPI. Its state is 
> > preserved.
> >
> > Tristan.
>
>I see. For example, preserving a vcpu context is unnecessary after
>SAL_XEN_SAL_RETURN for save/restore of a domain.
>
>Thanks,
>Kouya
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Xen-ia64-devel mailing list
>Xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ia64-devel

_______________________________________________
Xen-ia64-devel mailing list
Xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ia64-devel

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>