[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <b21d3544-2257-dee5-222d-f4dade94d167@suse.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2020 15:17:52 +0200
From: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@...e.com>
To: Jürgen Groß <jgross@...e.com>
Cc: xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org, x86@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>,
Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@...nel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/5] xen/events: only register debug interrupt for
2-level events
On 22.10.2020 15:09, Jürgen Groß wrote:
> On 22.10.20 12:35, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 22.10.2020 11:49, Juergen Gross wrote:
>>> @@ -2080,10 +2080,12 @@ void __init xen_init_IRQ(void)
>>> int ret = -EINVAL;
>>> evtchn_port_t evtchn;
>>>
>>> - if (fifo_events)
>>> + if (xen_fifo_events)
>>> ret = xen_evtchn_fifo_init();
>>> - if (ret < 0)
>>> + if (ret < 0) {
>>> xen_evtchn_2l_init();
>>> + xen_fifo_events = false;
>>> + }
>>
>> Another note: While it may not matter right here, maybe better
>> first set the variable and the call the function?
>
> I don't think this is really important, TBH.
>
> This code is executed before other cpus are up and we'd have major
> other problems in case the sequence would really matter here.
Fair enough; I was thinking in particular that it ought to be
legitimate for xen_evtchn_2l_init() to BUG_ON(xen_fifo_events).
Jan
Powered by blists - more mailing lists