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/
Home Products Support Community News


Re: [Xen-devel] xen kernel crash at boot since 23598:b24018319772

To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] xen kernel crash at boot since 23598:b24018319772
From: Keir Fraser <keir.xen@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2011 11:18:23 +0100
Cc: Christoph Egger <Christoph.Egger@xxxxxxx>, "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Fri, 01 Jul 2011 03:18:59 -0700
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=user-agent:date:subject:from:to:cc:message-id:thread-topic :thread-index:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=bzkHmFE9uHVW5t7qTPt6p9kH1HzF+lTxvk+C+FdiwnM=; b=us/thLiKuL4J+opFSgVFvJ0/qRVid2DHGYT2SyHMipp6jqfm1fykpRwkpZAhQRt3xV 8q6Docvwg1qUShBQqqbS+VNjX1WfG6MI29rSQuM5PCO2Eoz8qUX1rktYWtiif+vYrgen jEzy54O/3iycyU2VMWcfHoETJgvwumbua5yzI=
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <4E0DB760020000780004B949@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
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>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thread-index: Acw32DUWgBB44RuPSUalekM8/cM5/w==
Thread-topic: [Xen-devel] xen kernel crash at boot since 23598:b24018319772
User-agent: Microsoft-Entourage/
On 01/07/2011 11:02, "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>>>> On 30.06.11 at 18:33, Keir Fraser <keir.xen@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Note that domain_spin_lock_irq_desc() has a retry loop for a reason! It
>> knows that pirq-irq mapping may change under its feet, so it needs to
>> re-check the mapping with the desc_lock held, at which point the mapping
>> cannot change *if* it obtained the correct desc_lock in time!
>> Perhaps pirq_spin_lock_irq_desc() needs a similar retry loop? Perhaps
> Yes. Will send a patch soon.
>> pirq_spin_lock_irq_desc() should never have been forked from
>> domain_spin_lock_irq_desc(), and all callers should simply use the former?
> I'd rather not - the lookup isn't really inexpensive (and doesn't need
> to be re-done on each iteration either), which is why I created the
> clone in the first place. Instead I think that with adding the retry
> loop here, domain_spin_lock_irq_desc() could become a simple
> wrapper around pirq_spin_lock_irq_desc().

Yes please!

 -- Keir

> Jan

Xen-devel mailing list

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