xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@novell.com>
To: Keir Fraser <keir.xen@gmail.com>
Cc: Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@intel.com>,
	xen devel <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86, cpuidle: remove assertion on X86_FEATURE_TSC_RELIABLE
Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 08:14:00 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4DCCF65802000078000412A4@vpn.id2.novell.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <C9F2865E.1A39D%keir.xen@gmail.com>

>>> On 13.05.11 at 07:55, Keir Fraser <keir.xen@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 13/05/2011 03:45, "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@intel.com> wrote:
> 
>> x86, cpuidle: remove assertion on X86_FEATURE_TSC_RELIABLE
>> 
>> 23228:1329d99b4f16 disables deep cstate to avoid restoring tsc when
>> tsc msr is not writtable on some old platform, which however also
>> adds an assertion on X86_FEATURE_TSC_RELIABLE in cstate_restore_tsc.
>> The two don't match as tsc writtable-ness has nothing to do with
>> whether it's reliable. As long as Xen can use tsc as the time source
>> and it's writable, it should be OK to continue using deep cstate
>> with tsc save/restore.
> 
> Looks like I just got the assertion the wrong way round, should be
> ASSERT(!boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_TSC_RELIABLE)).

No, the assertion is correct imo (since tsc_check_writability() bails
immediately when boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_TSC_RELIABLE)).

But the problem Kevin reports is exactly what I expected when
we discussed the whole change. Nevertheless, simply removing the
assertion won't be correct - instead your addition of the early
bail out on TSC_RELIABLE is what I'd now put under question (the
comment that goes with it, as we now see, isn't correct).

Jan

  parent reply	other threads:[~2011-05-13  7:14 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-05-13  2:45 [PATCH] x86, cpuidle: remove assertion on X86_FEATURE_TSC_RELIABLE Tian, Kevin
2011-05-13  5:55 ` Keir Fraser
2011-05-13  6:01   ` Tian, Kevin
2011-05-13  7:14   ` Jan Beulich [this message]
2011-05-13  7:28     ` Tian, Kevin
2011-05-13  8:17       ` Jan Beulich
2011-05-13  8:29     ` Keir Fraser
2011-05-13  8:49       ` Tian, Kevin
2011-05-13  9:15         ` Keir Fraser
2011-05-13  9:42           ` Jan Beulich
2011-05-17  0:51           ` Tian, Kevin
2011-05-13 17:16         ` Dan Magenheimer
2011-05-17  0:50           ` Tian, Kevin
2011-05-17  7:58             ` 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=4DCCF65802000078000412A4@vpn.id2.novell.com \
    --to=jbeulich@novell.com \
    --cc=keir.xen@gmail.com \
    --cc=kevin.tian@intel.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).