linux-kernel - Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 03/12] evtchn delivery on HVM

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1006171558570.3401@kaball-desktop>
Date:	Thu, 17 Jun 2010 16:41:49 +0100
From:	Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@...citrix.com>
To:	Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>
CC:	Stefano Stabellini <Stefano.Stabellini@...citrix.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"jeremy@...p.org" <jeremy@...p.org>,
	"xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com" <xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com>,
	"ddutile@...hat.com" <ddutile@...hat.com>,
	"sheng@...ux.intel.com" <sheng@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 03/12] evtchn delivery on HVM

On Mon, 14 Jun 2010, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> > +static int __cpuinit xen_hvm_cpu_notify(struct notifier_block *self,
> > +				    unsigned long action, void *hcpu)
> > +{
> > +	int cpu = (long)hcpu;
> > +	switch (action) {
> > +	case CPU_UP_PREPARE:
> > +		per_cpu(xen_vcpu, cpu) = &HYPERVISOR_shared_info->vcpu_info[cpu];
> > +		break;
> 
> Is there no need to do anything if the CPUs are brought down?
> 

nope


> > +/* the callback vector mechanism is a newer alternative way of receiving
> > + * event channel notifications from Xen: we can receive vector callbacks
> > + * on any vcpus and we don't need any PCI or IO APIC support */
> 
> I am not an expert in English, but I think you need to revise this
> comment.


/* vector callbacks are better than PCI interrupts to receive event
 * channel notifications because we can receive vector callbacks on any
 * vcpu and we don't need PCI support or APIC interactions */

is it good enough?


> > +void xen_callback_vector(void)
> > +{
> > +	int rc;
> > +	uint64_t callback_via;
> > +	if (xen_have_vector_callback) {
> > +		callback_via = HVM_CALLBACK_VECTOR(XEN_HVM_EVTCHN_CALLBACK);
> > +		rc = xen_set_callback_via(callback_via);
> > +		if (rc) {
> > +			printk(KERN_ERR "request for callback vector failed\n");
> 
> Perhaps mention which type? Say 'Request for Xen HVM callback vector
> failed.\n' ?
> 

good idea, I'll do that
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/