On September 06, 2016 9:21 PM, Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com> wrote: >>>> On 06.09.16 at 13:22, <xuqu...@huawei.com> wrote: >> On September 06, 2016 5:05 PM, Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com> >>>>>> On 06.09.16 at 10:53, <xuqu...@huawei.com> wrote: >>>> to be honest, my fix is also a tradeoff.. w/ my patch, multiple >>>> pending pt interrupt instances may be combined as one injection of >>>> guest timer interrupt.. >>>> but as Yang said, It should be ok since it happens rarely and even >>>> native OS will encounter the same problem if it disable the >>>> interrupt for too >>>long. >>> >>>And one OS may properly deal with that situation while another might >>>not. For example, let me remind you of issues the hypervisor had in >>>earlier days when no event/softirq processing happened for long >>>enough, resulting in time management issues due to missed platform >>>timer overflow handling. IOW an OS may avoid that situation by simply not >disabling IRQs for too long a time. >>> >> Thanks for your reminding, >> Jan, do you have any suggestion to fix this PT and apicv issue? >> What do you think about Kevin's? > >Kevin's suggestion sounded reasonable, iirc, and I'd rely on his and your >better >VMX knowledge for the low level details. >
I'll try to verify Kevin's later. Kevin is really a master but I am just a rookie. I always appreciate both of your education.. Quan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
