Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v10 11/20] x86/VPMU: Interface for setting PMU mode and flags

[Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On 09/19/2014 02:51 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > > > On 18.09.14 at 23:50, <boris.ostrovsky@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On 09/18/2014 12:11 AM, Tian, Kevin wrote:
> > > > From: Boris Ostrovsky [mailto:boris.ostrovsky@xxxxxxxxxx]
> > > > +{
> > > > +    unsigned i, j, allbutself_num, tasknum, mycpu;
> > > > +    static s_time_t start;
> > > > +    static struct tasklet **sync_task;
> > > > +    struct vcpu *curr_vcpu = current;
> > > > +    static struct vcpu *sync_vcpu;
> > > > +    int ret = 0;
> > > > +
> > > > +    tasknum = allbutself_num = num_online_cpus() - 1;
> > > > +
> > > > +    if ( sync_task ) /* if set, we are in hypercall continuation */
> > > > +    {
> > > > +        if ( (sync_vcpu != NULL) && (sync_vcpu != curr_vcpu) )
> > > > +            /* We are not the original caller */
> > > > +            return -EAGAIN;
> > > I assume hypercall continuation will happen on original vcpu context. Under
> > > which situation the hypercall will be continued on a different vcpu? If yes,
> > > would it be an unbounded situation where you may wait unexpected time
> > > to have sync_vcpu==curr_vcpu?
> > The continuation call is gone in v11. If we are stuck waiting for more
> > than 5 seconds we'll simply return -EAGAIN and have the caller retry.
> That reads wrong, but I'd of course have to see whether the just
> wording above is incorrectly reflecting the code changes you did.
The only thing that I can think of that I didn't mention is 
hypercall_preempt_check() to bail out earlier than 5 seconds. Is that 
what you are missing in my reply? Otherwise  I don't know what else is 
wrong.
-boris

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