Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] target/alpha: Take BQL around clock manipulations

2017-03-06 Thread Alex Bennée
Richard Henderson writes: > On 03/07/2017 08:00 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >>> Signed-off-by: Richard Henderson >>> --- >>> This is similar to the patch that I saw go by for MIPS. >>> >>> I hadn't noticed any problems caused by this lack of locking. This may >>> be because interrupts cannot be d

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] target/alpha: Take BQL around clock manipulations

2017-03-06 Thread Richard Henderson
On 03/07/2017 08:00 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote: Signed-off-by: Richard Henderson --- This is similar to the patch that I saw go by for MIPS. I hadn't noticed any problems caused by this lack of locking. This may be because interrupts cannot be delivered while in PALmode while these registers are

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] target/alpha: Take BQL around clock manipulations

2017-03-06 Thread Paolo Bonzini
> Signed-off-by: Richard Henderson > --- > This is similar to the patch that I saw go by for MIPS. > > I hadn't noticed any problems caused by this lack of locking. This may > be because interrupts cannot be delivered while in PALmode while these > registers are being manipulated. However, it's

[Qemu-devel] [PATCH] target/alpha: Take BQL around clock manipulations

2017-03-06 Thread Richard Henderson
Signed-off-by: Richard Henderson --- This is similar to the patch that I saw go by for MIPS. I hadn't noticed any problems caused by this lack of locking. This may be because interrupts cannot be delivered while in PALmode while these registers are being manipulated. However, it's always better