[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1323444329.1937.22.camel@frodo>
Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2011 10:25:29 -0500
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Jason Baron <jbaron@...hat.com>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...ux.intel.com>,
Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 3/3] x86: Add workaround to NMI iret woes
On Fri, 2011-12-09 at 16:10 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> KVM does NMIs, the write_idt thing is a paravirt call. Then again, a
> vcpu is a single thread of execution, there can only ever be 1 hypercall
> at the same time.
>
> The only thing that remains is if the hypercall interface is NMI-safe,
> what if the NMI comes in just as another context is also starting a
> hypercall. I really don't know enough about all that crap to know.
Hmm, well we can detect that we are a paravirt guest or not (that's the
nature of paravirt). We can keep the current methods around, an for
paravirt guests, it will fall back to the old stop_machine() method.
Heck guests have issues with latencies anyway.
For running on bare-metal, we can switch to this method.
-- Steve
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists