On 2012-10-23 07:52, liu ping fan wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 6:40 PM, Avi Kivity <a...@redhat.com> wrote:
>> On 10/22/2012 11:23 AM, Liu Ping Fan wrote:
>>> The broken device state is caused by releasing local lock before acquiring
>>> big lock. To fix this issue, we have two choice:
>>> 1.use busy flag to protect the state
>>> The drawback is that we will introduce independent busy flag for each
>>> independent device's logic unit.
>>> 2.reload the device's state
>>> The drawback is if the call chain is too deep, the action to reload will
>>> touch each layer. Also the reloading means to recaculate the
>>> intermediate
>>> result based on device's regs.
>>>
>>> This patch adopt the solution 1 to fix the issue.
>>
>> Doesn't the nested mmio patch detect this?
>>
> It will only record and fix the issue on one thread. But guest can
> touch the emulated device on muti-threads.
Sorry, what does that mean? A second VCPU accessing the device will
simply be ignored when it races with another VCPU? Specifically
+ if (s->busy) {
+ return;
and
+ uint64_t ret = 0;
+
+ if (s->busy) {
+ return ret;
is worrying me.
Jan
--
Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT RTC ITP SDP-DE
Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux
