Paolo Bonzini <pbonz...@redhat.com> writes: > On 24/06/2015 19:18, Alex Bennée wrote: >>>> >> @@ -196,6 +196,8 @@ void arm_handle_psci_call(ARMCPU *cpu) >>>> >> } >>>> >> target_cpu_class->set_pc(target_cpu_state, entry); >>>> >> >>>> >> + qemu_cond_signal(target_cpu_state->halt_cond); >>> > >>> > That's called qemu_cpu_kick(target_cpu_state). :) The patch should be >>> > acceptable now upstream, I think. >> Oh so this might well fail in KVM too? >> >> The qemu_cpu_kick does a qemu_cond_broadcast(cpu->halt_cond) which seems >> a little excessive? Won't all sleeping CPUs wake up (and return to sleep)? > > On KVM (and I assume on MT-TCG), each CPU has a different halt_cond.
You are right of course, I got my sense the wrong way around. Given it is per-cpu I wonder if you will ever have multiple threads waiting on it? Anyway I'll fix that up and re-submit after I've tested to see of these test cases break current KVM. > > Paolo -- Alex Bennée
