From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 11/20] x86/VPMU: Interface for setting
 PMU mode and flags
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2014 08:42:40 -0400
Message-ID: <541C24C0.9070002@oracle.com>
References: <1409802080-6160-1-git-send-email-boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>
	<1409802080-6160-12-git-send-email-boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>
	<AADFC41AFE54684AB9EE6CBC0274A5D1260865E2@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com>
	<541B53BE.4000909@oracle.com>
	<541BEE9202000078000366AE@mail.emea.novell.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
In-Reply-To: <541BEE9202000078000366AE@mail.emea.novell.com>
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: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>, "Aravind.Gopalakrishnan@amd.com" <Aravind.Gopalakrishnan@amd.com>
Cc: "tim@xen.org" <tim@xen.org>, Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@intel.com>, "keir@xen.org" <keir@xen.org>, "suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com" <suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com>, "andrew.cooper3@citrix.com" <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>, Eddie Dong <eddie.dong@intel.com>, "xen-devel@lists.xen.org" <xen-devel@lists.xen.org>, Jun Nakajima <jun.nakajima@intel.com>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On 09/19/2014 02:51 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 18.09.14 at 23:50, <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com> wrote:
>> On 09/18/2014 12:11 AM, Tian, Kevin wrote:
>>>> From: Boris Ostrovsky [mailto:boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com]
>>>> +{
>>>> +    unsigned i, j, allbutself_num, tasknum, mycpu;
>>>> +    static s_time_t start;
>>>> +    static struct tasklet **sync_task;
>>>> +    struct vcpu *curr_vcpu = current;
>>>> +    static struct vcpu *sync_vcpu;
>>>> +    int ret = 0;
>>>> +
>>>> +    tasknum = allbutself_num = num_online_cpus() - 1;
>>>> +
>>>> +    if ( sync_task ) /* if set, we are in hypercall continuation */
>>>> +    {
>>>> +        if ( (sync_vcpu != NULL) && (sync_vcpu != curr_vcpu) )
>>>> +            /* We are not the original caller */
>>>> +            return -EAGAIN;
>>> I assume hypercall continuation will happen on original vcpu context. Under
>>> which situation the hypercall will be continued on a different vcpu? If yes,
>>> would it be an unbounded situation where you may wait unexpected time
>>> to have sync_vcpu==curr_vcpu?
>> The continuation call is gone in v11. If we are stuck waiting for more
>> than 5 seconds we'll simply return -EAGAIN and have the caller retry.
> That reads wrong, but I'd of course have to see whether the just
> wording above is incorrectly reflecting the code changes you did.

The only thing that I can think of that I didn't mention is 
hypercall_preempt_check() to bail out earlier than 5 seconds. Is that 
what you are missing in my reply? Otherwise  I don't know what else is 
wrong.

-boris