From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Jan Beulich" Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] Fix lost interrupt race in Xen event channels Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2010 07:38:13 +0100 Message-ID: <4C7CBF75020000780001308A@vpn.id2.novell.com> References: <4C743B2C.8070208@goop.org> <4C74E7C802000078000120C0@vpn.id2.novell.com> <4C7558E0.1060806@goop.org> <4C7629D10200007800012387@vpn.id2.novell.com> <4C769736.4050409@goop.org> <4C7799EB020000780001276F@vpn.id2.novell.com> <1282941781.26797.386.camel@agari.van.xensource.com> <4C7B81FB0200007800012C16@vpn.id2.novell.com> <4C7BDE0F.1010305@goop.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: In-Reply-To: <4C7BDE0F.1010305@goop.org> Content-Disposition: inline List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge Cc: "Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" , Tom Kopec , Daniel Stodden List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org >>> On 30.08.10 at 18:36, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: > On 08/30/2010 01:03 AM, Jan Beulich wrote: >> For us, using fasteoi, move_native_irq() sits in ->eoi(), before >> un-masking. One could, as Jeremy suggests, call move_masked_irq() >> here, but I didn't want to duplicate the IRQ_DISABLED check done >> in move_native_irq(), mainly to not depend on following potential >> future changes (additions) to the set of conditions checked there. >=20 > Is there actually a problem with moving a IRQ_DISABLED interrupt? If > so, shouldn't that IRQ_DISABLED check also be in move_masked_irq()? I don't know, all I do know is that it initially wasn't that way, but got changed to this at some point. Maybe it's more like being pointless to move a disabled interrupt? Jan