>>> On 01.09.16 at 11:22, <feng...@intel.com> wrote: >> From: Jan Beulich [mailto:jbeul...@suse.com] >> Sent: Thursday, September 1, 2016 4:21 PM >> >>> On 31.08.16 at 05:56, <feng...@intel.com> wrote: >> > This patch handles some concern cases when the last assigned device >> > is removed from the domain. In this case we should carefully handle >> > pi descriptor and the per-cpu blocking list, to make sure: >> > - all the PI descriptor are in the right state when next time a >> > devices is assigned to the domain again. >> > - No remaining vcpus of the domain in the per-cpu blocking list. >> > >> > Basically, we pause the domain before zapping the PI hooks and >> > removing the vCPU from the blocking list, then unpause it after >> > that. >> > >> > Signed-off-by: Feng Wu <feng...@intel.com> >> >> Looks plausible, but >> a) as already for patch 1 I'm missing information on what changed >> since v2 and > > The biggest changes since v2 is that we use domain pause/unpause > (suggested by George) to handle the concern case, while v2 was using > some ugly and tricky method to do it, which was considered as hard > to maintain. > >> b) doesn't this make unnecessary patch 1? > > The purpose of patch 1 is to make sure the two hooks are installed > while CPU side PI is available event VT-d PI is not supported, I cannot > see why this patch will make it unnecessary.
So I guess this doesn't hold anymore with your subsequent reply to my comments on patch 1? Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
