From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
Subject: Re: kernel bootup slow issue on ovm3.1.1
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2013 13:55:56 -0400
Message-ID: <20130429175556.GA3921@phenom.dumpdata.com>
References: <502235E8.9040309@oracle.com>
	<50229B840200007800093A73@nat28.tlf.novell.com>
	<5023860E.7080908@oracle.com>
	<5023AE960200007800093DE8@nat28.tlf.novell.com>
	<502490A7.7020603@oracle.com>
	<502535280200007800094322@nat28.tlf.novell.com>
	<5028B3AB.7060705@oracle.com>
	<5028E53202000078000946B1@nat28.tlf.novell.com>
	<503DAA5F.5030306@oracle.com>
	<20120830090312.GA54290@ocelot.phlegethon.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20120830090312.GA54290@ocelot.phlegethon.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Tim Deegan <tim@xen.org>
Cc: Satish Kantheti <satish.kantheti@oracle.com>, Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>, Feng Jin <joe.jin@oracle.com>, "zhenzhong.duan" <zhenzhong.duan@oracle.com>, xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xen.org>, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 10:03:12AM +0100, Tim Deegan wrote:
> At 13:36 +0800 on 29 Aug (1346247391), zhenzhong.duan wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > ??? 2012-08-13 17:29, Jan Beulich ??????:
> > >>>>On 13.08.12 at 09:58, "zhenzhong.duan"<zhenzhong.duan@oracle.com>  
> > >>>>wrote:
> > >>??? 2012-08-10 22:22, Jan Beulich ??????:
> > >>>Going back to your original mail, I wonder however why this
> > >>>gets done at all. You said it got there via
> > >>>
> > >>>mtrr_aps_init()
> > >>>   \->   set_mtrr()
> > >>>       \->   mtrr_work_handler()
> > >>>
> > >>>yet this isn't done unconditionally - see the comment before
> > >>>checking mtrr_aps_delayed_init. Can you find out where the
> > >>>obviously necessary call(s) to set_mtrr_aps_delayed_init()
> > >>>come(s) from?
> > >>At bootup stage, set_mtrr_aps_delayed_init is called by
> > >>native_smp_prepare_cpus.
> > >>mtrr_aps_delayed_init is always set to ture for intel processor in 
> > >>upstream
> > >>code.
> > >Indeed, and that (in one form or another) has been done
> > >virtually forever in Linux. I wonder why the problem wasn't
> > >noticed (or looked into, if it was noticed) so far.
> > >
> > >As it's going to be rather difficult to convince the Linux folks
> > >to change their code (plus this wouldn't help with existing
> > >kernels anyway), we'll need to find a way to improve this in
> > >the hypervisor.
> > Hi Jan, Tim
> > Is this issue improvable from xen side?
> 
> Probably; we're looking into the best way to address it. 
> 
> Tim.

Ping? Was there any progress on this? Thanks