[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZqzzVRQYCmUwD0OL@google.com>
Date: Fri, 2 Aug 2024 07:55:17 -0700
From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
To: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Michael Kelley <mhklinux@...look.com>,
"lirongqing@...du.com" <lirongqing@...du.com>, "kys@...rosoft.com" <kys@...rosoft.com>,
"haiyangz@...rosoft.com" <haiyangz@...rosoft.com>, "wei.liu@...nel.org" <wei.liu@...nel.org>,
"decui@...rosoft.com" <decui@...rosoft.com>, "mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>, "bp@...en8.de" <bp@...en8.de>,
"dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com" <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
"linux-hyperv@...r.kernel.org" <linux-hyperv@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] clockevents/drivers/i8253: Do not zero timer counter in shutdown
On Fri, Aug 02, 2024, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Thu, 2024-08-01 at 20:54 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 01 2024 at 16:14, Michael Kelley wrote:
> > > I don't have a convenient way to test my sequence on KVM.
> >
> > But still fails in KVM
>
> By KVM you mean the in-kernel one that we want to kill because everyone
> should be using userspace IRQ chips these days?
What exactly do you want to kill? In-kernel local APIC obviously needs to stay
for APICv/AVIC.
And IMO, encouraging userspace I/O APIC emulation is a net negative for KVM and
the community as a whole, as the number of VMMs in use these days results in a
decent amount of duplicated work in userspace VMMs, especially when accounting
for hardware and software quirks.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists