From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Boris Ostrovsky Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 14/19] x86/VPMU: Handle PMU interrupts for PV guests Date: Fri, 06 Jun 2014 17:21:15 -0400 Message-ID: <539230CB.9020305@oracle.com> References: <1402076415-26475-1-git-send-email-boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com> <1402076415-26475-15-git-send-email-boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com> <5392274C.1070006@citrix.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <5392274C.1070006@citrix.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Andrew Cooper Cc: kevin.tian@intel.com, keir@xen.org, JBeulich@suse.com, jun.nakajima@intel.com, tim@xen.org, dietmar.hahn@ts.fujitsu.com, xen-devel@lists.xen.org, suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 06/06/2014 04:40 PM, Andrew Cooper wrote: > > + > int vpmu_do_interrupt(struct cpu_user_regs *regs) > { > struct vcpu *v = current; > - struct vpmu_struct *vpmu = vcpu_vpmu(v); > + struct vpmu_struct *vpmu; > Perhaps an ASSERT(system_state == SYS_STATE_active) to sanity check the > environment before we start assuming that dom0s vcpus are constructed? I think this may not work --- if we are being suspended we first change state to SYS_STATE_suspend and then start pausing domains. We may get a PMU interrupt between these two. -boris