[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v18 14/16] x86/VPMU: NMI-based VPMU support
- To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>
- From: Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2015 11:24:34 -0500
- Cc: kevin.tian@xxxxxxxxx, suravee.suthikulpanit@xxxxxxx, andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx, tim@xxxxxxx, dietmar.hahn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, Aravind.Gopalakrishnan@xxxxxxx, jun.nakajima@xxxxxxxxx, dgdegra@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Delivery-date: Fri, 20 Feb 2015 16:24:51 +0000
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xen.org>
On 02/20/2015 10:03 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 16.02.15 at 23:26, <boris.ostrovsky@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
+int pmu_nmi_interrupt(const struct cpu_user_regs *regs, int cpu)
static
+{
+ return vpmu_do_interrupt(regs);
That function returning 1 makes do_nmi() not do _anything_ else, i.e.
ignore eventual SERR or IOCHK events. That's not acceptable. I guess
you'll need to make nmi_callback() return values tristate and adjust
do_nmi() to deal with both cases. Albeit - the other two users are
breaking this too, so perhaps do_nmi() should be adjusted in a prereq
(and backportable) patch to not bail in that case. Yet a tristate may
still be needed, since alternative_instructions() legitimately wants to
suppress them getting handled - it would just need to invoke their
handling once done with patching.
I think I will separate this patch from the series then and submit it later.
-boris
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
