WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

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/
   
 
 
Xen 
 
Home Products Support Community News
 
   
 

xen-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH 3/5] x86/pvclock: add vsyscall implementation

To: Avi Kivity <avi@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH 3/5] x86/pvclock: add vsyscall implementation
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 07 Oct 2009 14:51:52 -0700
Cc: Dan Magenheimer <dan.magenheimer@xxxxxxxxxx>, Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy.fitzhardinge@xxxxxxxxxx>, kurt.hackel@xxxxxxxxxx, the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@xxxxxxxxxx>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Glauber de Oliveira Costa <gcosta@xxxxxxxxxx>, Xen-devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Keir Fraser <keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Zach Brown <zach.brown@xxxxxxxxxx>, Chris Mason <chris.mason@xxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Wed, 07 Oct 2009 14:52:15 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <4ACD0A2B.1080307@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/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <1254790211-15416-1-git-send-email-jeremy.fitzhardinge@xxxxxxxxxx> <1254790211-15416-4-git-send-email-jeremy.fitzhardinge@xxxxxxxxxx> <4ACB0833.2050203@xxxxxxxxxx> <4ACB9074.1000804@xxxxxxxx> <4ACC6C9C.7080707@xxxxxxxxxx> <4ACCEC18.90401@xxxxxxxx> <4ACCF565.30804@xxxxxxxxxx> <4ACD05D8.5090903@xxxxxxxx> <4ACD0A2B.1080307@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.4pre) Gecko/20090922 Fedora/3.0-2.7.b4.fc11 Lightning/1.0pre Thunderbird/3.0b4
On 10/07/09 14:37, Avi Kivity wrote:
> If the guest does a RMW on the version, but the host does not (copying
> it from somewhere else), then the guest RMW can be lost.
>
> Looking at the code, that's what kvm does:
>
>     vcpu->hv_clock.version += 2;
>
>     shared_kaddr = kmap_atomic(vcpu->time_page, KM_USER0);
>
>     memcpy(shared_kaddr + vcpu->time_offset, &vcpu->hv_clock,
>            sizeof(vcpu->hv_clock));
>
> so a guest-side ++version can be lost.

I see, yes.  The Xen code explicitly reads back the guest version and
increments that (I realize now that's what you meant by guest-private
version).  If you were to have a second version number it would have to
be separated as well to avoid being overwritten by the hypervisor.

    J

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

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