From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=36945 helo=eggs.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OVhgY-00058k-9u
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 05 Jul 2010 05:09:55 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <gleb@redhat.com>) id 1OVhgX-0001Tk-25
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 05 Jul 2010 05:09:54 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:18762)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <gleb@redhat.com>) id 1OVhgW-0001TT-Rl
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 05 Jul 2010 05:09:53 -0400
Date: Mon, 5 Jul 2010 12:09:41 +0300
From: Gleb Natapov <gleb@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [Bug 599958] Re: Timedrift problems with
	Win7: hpet missing time drift fixups
Message-ID: <20100705090941.GM4689@redhat.com>
References: <AANLkTikwwlHm--1-yCquTZwdonYn0soYguEIQoOw0N1R@mail.gmail.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>
	<4C31A0EC.7020803@web.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4C31A0EC.7020803@web.de>
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@web.de>
Cc: Blue Swirl <blauwirbel@gmail.com>, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>, Paul Brook <paul@codesourcery.com>

On Mon, Jul 05, 2010 at 11:07:56AM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> 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).
> >>>      
> >> Well, the generic solution would be returning a bitmap of the CPUs that
> >> were affected, but this is impractical. However, at least x86 should be
> >> 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)
> >>    
> > 
> > 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?
> 
Ack notifiers go with mask notifiers.

> > 
> > 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
> 



--
			Gleb.