[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <57189659.6040807@suse.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2016 10:59:05 +0200
From: Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>
To: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@...nel.org>,
xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com,
david.vrabel@...rix.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xen/x86: don't lose event interrupts
On 16/04/16 03:23, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> On slow platforms with unreliable TSC, such as QEMU emulated machines,
> it is possible for the kernel to request the next event in the past. In
> that case, in the current implementation of xen_vcpuop_clockevent, we
> simply return -ETIME. To be precise the Xen returns -ETIME and we pass
> it on. However the result of this is a missed event, which simply causes
> the kernel to hang.
>
> Instead it is better to always ask the hypervisor for a timer event,
> even if the timeout is in the past. That way there are no lost
> interrupts and the kernel survives. To do that, remove the
> VCPU_SSHOTTMR_future flag.
>
> Signed-off-by: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@...nel.org>
Acked-by: Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/xen/time.c b/arch/x86/xen/time.c
> index a0a4e55..6deba5b 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/xen/time.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/xen/time.c
> @@ -290,11 +290,11 @@ static int xen_vcpuop_set_next_event(unsigned long delta,
> WARN_ON(!clockevent_state_oneshot(evt));
>
> single.timeout_abs_ns = get_abs_timeout(delta);
> - single.flags = VCPU_SSHOTTMR_future;
> + /* Get an event anyway, even if the timeout is already expired */
> + single.flags = 0;
>
> ret = HYPERVISOR_vcpu_op(VCPUOP_set_singleshot_timer, cpu, &single);
> -
> - BUG_ON(ret != 0 && ret != -ETIME);
> + BUG_ON(ret != 0);
>
> return ret;
> }
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists