From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=46544 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OVheo-0004hn-Es for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 05 Jul 2010 05:08:07 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OVhen-0001CR-52 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 05 Jul 2010 05:08:06 -0400 Received: from fmmailgate02.web.de ([217.72.192.227]:37819) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OVhem-0001C8-OR for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 05 Jul 2010 05:08:05 -0400 Message-ID: <4C31A0EC.7020803@web.de> Date: Mon, 05 Jul 2010 11:07:56 +0200 From: Jan Kiszka MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [Bug 599958] Re: Timedrift problems with Win7: hpet missing time drift fixups References: <20100629211802.16137.10587.malonedeb@soybean.canonical.com> <4C2EECE8.8030305@web.de> <201007042306.57852.paul@codesourcery.com> <4C317E2A.7090101@web.de> <20100705064239.GI4689@redhat.com> <4C31807B.2030401@web.de> <20100705070017.GJ4689@redhat.com> <4C318B74.3040403@web.de> <4C319C30.30308@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <4C319C30.30308@redhat.com> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enigB341BB152FD6E6C4E7814D28" Sender: jan.kiszka@web.de List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Avi Kivity Cc: Blue Swirl , Paul Brook , Gleb Natapov , qemu-devel@nongnu.org This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enigB341BB152FD6E6C4E7814D28 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Avi Kivity wrote: > On 07/05/2010 10:36 AM, Jan Kiszka wrote: >> >>> Assumes that CPU with >>> lowest index is BSP (that one we can actually guaranty if we want >>> to). >>> =20 >> Well, the generic solution would be returning a bitmap of the CPUs tha= t >> were affected, but this is impractical. However, at least x86 should b= e >> fine with the information "state change also on BSP", e.g. like this: >> 0 - state change on one or more CPUs, none of them is the BSP >> 1 - state change on BSP (and possible more CPUs) >> =20 >=20 > What about ack notifiers? Ask the APIC to notify you when an interrupt= > is acked. That allows you to track the BSP, all cpus, or some subset. = > Masking can be seen at the irq controller level. So, if I understand you correctly, an IRQ state change that is ignored due to masking would invoke the ack notifier chain as well? >=20 > It's more involved, but provides more information. Well, it requires to establish ack notifier chains in parallel to the existing IRQ delivery routes. Definitely more invasive. Jan --------------enigB341BB152FD6E6C4E7814D28 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkwxoPAACgkQitSsb3rl5xQfdgCfQXt42kUL3RR0STHgypXNwwW2 xt4Anjos/TPW65ZEc5SpWdG+/DxExbUm =b8OA -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enigB341BB152FD6E6C4E7814D28--