Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v11 5/5] xen/arm: account for stolen ticks

[Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, 5 Nov 2015, Mark Rutland wrote:
> >  static void xen_percpu_init(void)
> >  {
> >     struct vcpu_register_vcpu_info info;
> > @@ -104,6 +120,8 @@ static void xen_percpu_init(void)
> >     BUG_ON(err);
> >     per_cpu(xen_vcpu, cpu) = vcpup;
> >  
> > +   xen_setup_runstate_info(cpu);
> 
> Does the runstate memory area get unregsitered when a kernel tears
> things down, or is kexec somehow inhibited for xen guests?
> 
> i couldn't spot either happening, but I may have missed it.

I don't think that the runstate memory area needs to be unregistered for
kexec, but I am not very knowledgeble on kexec and Xen, CC'ing Vitaly
and David.


> > +
> >  after_register_vcpu_info:
> >     enable_percpu_irq(xen_events_irq, 0);
> >     put_cpu();
> > @@ -271,6 +289,9 @@ static int __init xen_guest_init(void)
> >  
> >     register_cpu_notifier(&xen_cpu_notifier);
> >  
> > +   pv_time_ops.steal_clock = xen_stolen_accounting;
> > +   static_key_slow_inc(&paravirt_steal_enabled);
> > +
> >     return 0;
> >  }
> >  early_initcall(xen_guest_init);
> > -- 
> > 1.7.10.4
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > linux-arm-kernel mailing list
> > linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
> > 
> 

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel