Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] x86/hvm: implement save/restore for posted interrupts

["Wu, Feng" <feng.wu@xxxxxxxxx>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jan Beulich
> Sent: Monday, July 28, 2014 2:47 PM
> To: Tian, Kevin
> Cc: Olaf Hering; Keir Fraser; Dong, Eddie; Dugger, Donald D;
> xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; Xu, Dongxiao; Nakajima, Jun; Zhang, Yang Z
> Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] x86/hvm: implement save/restore for posted
> interrupts
> 
> >>> On 25.07.14 at 23:31, <kevin.tian@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Well, my read of this patch is that it hides some problem other place by
> > forcing posted injection at restore. As Yang has pointed out, it is not
> > necessary once the notification has been synced to IRR it's done (will
> > be noted before vmentry). So at restore path, it's just about how pending
> > IRR is handled. Now the problem is that Yang can't reproduce the problem
> > locally (let's see any change with Olaf's further information), so we need
> > Olaf's help to figure out the real culprit with our input.
> 
> Searching the SDM I can't find any reference to IRR uses during
> interrupt recognition. The only reference I can find is that during
> delivery the IRR bit gets cleared and the new RVI determined by
> scanning IRR. Hence I wonder whether setting RVI post-restore
> instead of sync-ing IRR to PIR is what is needed?

If RVI needs to be restored, what about SVI?

Thanks,
Feng

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

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