From: Christoph Egger <Christoph.Egger@amd.com>
To: Keir Fraser <keir.fraser@eu.citrix.com>
Cc: "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/14] Nested Virtualization: localevent
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 2010 10:01:28 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201008101001.29449.Christoph.Egger@amd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <C881D473.1CF0F%keir.fraser@eu.citrix.com>
On Friday 06 August 2010 16:02:11 Keir Fraser wrote:
> On 06/08/2010 10:17, "Christoph Egger" <Christoph.Egger@amd.com> wrote:
> > For this reason, nestedhvm_vcpu_destroy() (added in patch 5/14)
> > does a nestedsvm_vcpu_stgi() to prevent the interrupts/events
> > from being blocked by hvm_interrupt_blocked() (see patch 9/14)
> > and level 1 guest remaining in a zombie state.
>
> Ah, this is the crux of it. You shouldn't need to stgi from the vcpu
> destructor. It makes no sense and doing it shouldn't leave you with a
> zombie domain.
I backed out the 'localevent' patch in my local tree, removed the stgi
call in the vcpu destructor and run tests. A lot of things have been
changed since the issue has been found and the real bug might have
already been fixed in the meantime.
I haven't seen any issues with that changes in my tests so my next
patch series I send will have the localevent patch and the stgi call
dropped.
> Indeed, vcpu_destroy() is called from the very final domain
> destructor -- vcpu_destroy's caller finishes by freeing the domain
> structure itself, so not much chance of hanging around as a zombie! I'm
> assuming you call nestedhvm_vcpu_destroy() on the vcpu_destroy() path here
> by the way...
Yes, your assumption is correct.
> If it's called from some other context then I think its name
> is misleading and should be changed.
>
> -- Keir
Christoph
--
---to satisfy European Law for business letters:
Advanced Micro Devices GmbH
Einsteinring 24, 85609 Dornach b. Muenchen
Geschaeftsfuehrer: Alberto Bozzo, Andrew Bowd
Sitz: Dornach, Gemeinde Aschheim, Landkreis Muenchen
Registergericht Muenchen, HRB Nr. 43632
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-08-10 8:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-08-05 15:00 [PATCH 02/14] Nested Virtualization: localevent Christoph Egger
2010-08-05 15:46 ` Keir Fraser
2010-08-05 16:19 ` Keir Fraser
2010-08-06 9:17 ` Christoph Egger
2010-08-06 14:02 ` Keir Fraser
2010-08-10 8:01 ` Christoph Egger [this message]
2010-08-10 8:21 ` Keir Fraser
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=201008101001.29449.Christoph.Egger@amd.com \
--to=christoph.egger@amd.com \
--cc=keir.fraser@eu.citrix.com \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xensource.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).