Re: [Xen-devel] linux: {start, stop}_hz_timer() not really affecting periodic timer?

[Keir Fraser <Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 16/1/08 15:50, "Jan Beulich" <jbeulich@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>> start/stop_hz_timer() refer to Linux's own hz ticker. Xen does not deliver
>> periodic ticks when a guest is descheduled, so the Xen side of things is
>> implicitly handled already. There is no need for start/stop_hz_timer to
>> execute hypercalls to enact this.
> 
> Okay, okay, I didn't pay attention to this. But then
> VCPU_stop_periodic_timer seems a rather academic operation?

The default periodic timer is 10ms. If a guest does not want a periodic
timer at all, it can use VCPU_stop_periodic_timer. Clearly this is not
applicable to Linux.

>> The call to VCPUOP_set_singleshot_timer cannot return -ETIME because the
>> kernel does not specify the VCPU_SSHOTTMR_future flag.
> 
> I noticed this after pushing the send button. Nevertheless, the whole
> construct in stop_hz_timer() seems to assume that it is called with
> interrupts disabled, which might be the case now but nothing enforces
> xen_safe_halt() to only be called in such contexts... For that reason it
> would seem safer to set the flag, check for -ETIME, and avoid
> HYPERVISOR_block() altogether in that case.

If the time is in the past then the singleshot timer will fire immediately.
So you'll take a slower path than necessary, but the code as-is will work
fine.

 -- Keir



_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel