linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 6/5] KVM: x86: fix periodic lapic timer with hrtimers

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]

Date:   Wed, 26 Oct 2016 19:26:18 +0800
From:   Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@...il.com>
To:     Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
Cc:     Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...hat.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        kvm <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
        Yunhong Jiang <yunhong.jiang@...el.com>,
        Wanpeng Li <wanpeng.li@...mail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/5] KVM: x86: fix periodic lapic timer with hrtimers

2016-10-26 19:15 GMT+08:00 Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>:
>
>
> On 26/10/2016 12:23, Wanpeng Li wrote:
>>> >
>>> >         if (apic_lvtt_oneshot(apic) &&
>>> > -           ktime_after(apic->lapic_timer.target_expiration,
>>> > -                       apic->lapic_timer.timer.base->get_time())) {
>>> > +           !ktime_after(apic->lapic_timer.target_expiration,
>>> > +                        apic->lapic_timer.timer.base->get_time())) {
>>> >                 apic_timer_expired(apic);
>>> >                 return;
>>> >         }
>>> >
>>> > Paolo, can you squash that?
>> It seems that squash is impossible since the dependency of current
>> kvm/queue(KVM: x86: use ktime_get instead of seeking the
>> hrtimer_clock_base), I will send out a separate patch to fix this.
>
> It is squashed in:
>
> +       if (apic_lvtt_oneshot(apic) &&
> +           ktime_after(apic->lapic_timer.timer.base->get_time(),
> +                       apic->lapic_timer.target_expiration)) {
> +               apic_timer_expired(apic);
> +               return;
> +       }
>
> Notice that the order of the arguments is inverted (alternatively I
> could have used ktime_before).

Indeed.

Regards,
Wanpeng Li