On 23.07.19 14:08, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 23.07.2019 11:20, Juergen Gross wrote:
--- a/xen/common/schedule.c
+++ b/xen/common/schedule.c
@@ -708,6 +708,8 @@ void restore_vcpu_affinity(struct domain *d)
* set v->processor of each of their vCPUs to something that will
* make sense for the scheduler of the cpupool in which they are in.
*/
+ lock = vcpu_schedule_lock_irq(v);
+
cpumask_and(cpumask_scratch_cpu(cpu), v->cpu_hard_affinity,
cpupool_domain_cpumask(d));
if ( cpumask_empty(cpumask_scratch_cpu(cpu)) )
@@ -731,6 +733,9 @@ void restore_vcpu_affinity(struct domain *d)
v->processor = cpumask_any(cpumask_scratch_cpu(cpu));
+ spin_unlock_irq(lock);
+
+ /* v->processor might have changed, so reacquire the lock. */
Whoever commits this (perhaps me, later today) will want to replace
the hard tab here.
Oh, I'm sorry for that!
We really want checkpatch in Xen!
Juergen
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
