This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
Home Products Support Community News


[Xen-devel] Re: [patch 13/26] Xen-paravirt_ops: Consistently wrap paravi

To: Zachary Amsden <zach@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [Xen-devel] Re: [patch 13/26] Xen-paravirt_ops: Consistently wrap paravirt ops callsites to make them patchable
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2007 17:24:58 -0700 (PDT)
Cc: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xxxxxxxx>, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Rusty Russell <rusty@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, chrisw@xxxxxxxxxxxx, Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxx>, "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, anthony@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, mingo@xxxxxxx, David Miller <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Wed, 21 Mar 2007 02:28:51 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <46005B89.5070301@xxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <20070316.023331.59468179.davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <45FB005D.9060809@xxxxxxxx> <1174127638.8897.75.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20070318.003309.71088169.davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20070318120814.GA45869@xxxxxx> <1174272469.11680.23.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <m1648xxf93.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <Pine.LNX.4.64.0703191134190.6730@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1174348905.11680.54.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <45FF4043.4000805@xxxxxxxxxx> <45FF770C.7050301@xxxxxxxx> <Pine.LNX.4.64.0703200805450.6730@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <m1mz27sy82.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <Pine.LNX.4.64.0703200903500.6730@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <46000C7E.4070001@xxxxxxxx> <46005B89.5070301@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

On Tue, 20 Mar 2007, Zachary Amsden wrote:
> void local_irq_restore(int enabled)
> {
>    pda.intr_mask = enabled;
>    /*
>     * note there is a window here where softirqs are not processed by
>     * the interrupt handler, but that is not a problem, since it will
>     * get done here in the outer enable of any nested pair.
>     */
>    if (enabled)
>        local_bh_enable();
> }

Actually, this one is more complicated. You also need to actually enable 
hardware interrupts again if they got disabled by an interrupt actually 
occurring while the "soft-interrupt" was disabled.

But since it's all a local-cpu issue, you can do things like test 
cpu-local memory flags for whetehr that has happened or not.

So it *should* be something as simple as

                pda.irq_enable = 0;

                if (!pda.irq_enable) {
                        pda.irq_queued = 1;
                        .. make sure we return with hardirq's now 
                           disabled: just clear IF in the pt_regs ..
                .. normal ..

                pda.irq_enable = 1;
                /* Common case - nothing happened while we were fake-disabled.. 
                if (!pda.irq_queued)

                /* Ok, actually handle the things! */

                 * And enable the hw interrupts again, they got disabled 
                 * when we were queueing stuff.. 

but I haven't really gone over it in any detail, I may have missed 
something really obvious.

Anyway, it really *should* be pretty damn simple. No need to disable 
preemption, there should be no events that can *cause* it, since all 
interrupts get headed off at the pass.. (the return-from-interrupt thng 
should already notice that it's returning to an interrupts-disabled 
section and not try to do any preemption).

What did I miss?


Xen-devel mailing list

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>