Re: [patch] x86: kvm: Convert i8254/i8259 locks to raw_spinlocks

[Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@siemens.com>]

Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 02/18/2010 11:40 AM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>> Meanwhile, if anyone has any idea how to kill this lock, I'd love to see it.
>>>
>>>      
>> What concurrency does it resolve in the end? On first glance, it only
>> synchronize the fiddling with pre-VCPU request bits, right? What forces
>> us to do this? Wouldn't it suffice to disable preemption (thus
>> migration) and the let concurrent requests race for setting the bits? I
>> mean if some request bit was already set on entry, we don't include the
>>   related VCPU in smp_call_function_many anyway.
>>    
> 
> It's more difficult.
> 
> vcpu 0: sets request bit on vcpu 2
>            vcpu 1: test_and_set request bit on vcpu 2, returns already set
>            vcpu 1: returns
> vcpu 0: sends IPI
> vcpu 0: returns
> 
> so vcpu 1 returns before the IPI was performed.  If the request was a 
> tlb flush, for example, vcpu 1 may free a page that is still in vcpu 2's 
> tlb.

So the requests bits we are interested in are exclusively set in this
function under requests_lock?

Jan

-- 
Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT T DE IT 1
Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux