[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kvm
Subject:    Re: [PART1 RFC v3 12/12] svm: Manage vcpu load/unload when enable AVIC
From:       Radim =?utf-8?B?S3LEjW3DocWZ?= <rkrcmar () redhat ! com>
Date:       2016-03-31 14:19:08
Message-ID: 20160331141908.GA2171 () potion ! brq ! redhat ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

2016-03-31 15:52+0700, Suravee Suthikulpanit:
> On 03/19/2016 04:44 AM, Radim Krčmář wrote:
>>2016-03-18 01:09-0500, Suravee Suthikulpanit:
>>>+	} else {
>>>+		new_entry = READ_ONCE(*entry);
>>>+		/**
>>>+		 * This handles the case when vcpu is scheduled out
>>>+		 * and has not yet not called blocking. We save the
>>>+		 * AVIC running flag so that we can restore later.
>>>+		 */
>>
>>is_running must be disabled in between ...blocking and ...unblocking,
>>because we don't want to miss interrupts and block forever.
>>I somehow don't get it from the comment. :)
> 
> Not sure if I understand your concern.  However, the is_running bit
> setting/clearing should be handled in the avic_set_running below. This part
> only handles othe case when the is_running bit still set when calling
> vcpu_put (and later on loading some other vcpus). This way, when we are
> re-loading this vcpu, we can restore the is_running bit accordingly.

I think that the comment is misleading.  The saved is_running flag only
matters after svm_vcpu_blocking, yet the comment says that it handles
the irrelevant case before.

Another minor bug is that was_running isn't initialized to 1, so we need
to halt before is_running gets set.
It would be clearer to toggle a flag in svm_vcpu_(un)blocking and set
is_running = !is_blocking.  Doing so will also be immeasurably faster,
because avic_vcpu_load is called far more than svm_vcpu_(un)blocking.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]