| |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
xen-devel
[Xen-devel] RE: set_msi_affinity() vs. pci_restore_msi_state()
Jan,
Have you met any issue ? Per my understanding, there is no problem here.
For set_msi_affinity, it calls write_msi_msg to write the MSI info to real
hardware and also update it to (msi_desc)entry->msg, so entry->msg should store
the latest msi's data/addr. And only if pci_restore_msi_state uses entry->msg
to restore msi state, the correct info should be restored. And the key point is
that write_msi_msg not only update hardware's msi state, but it stores the
latest MSI info to msi descriptor entry->msg.
Xiantao
-----Original Message-----
From: Jan Beulich [mailto:JBeulich@xxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Saturday, March 06, 2010 12:04 AM
To: Zhang, Xiantao
Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: set_msi_affinity() vs. pci_restore_msi_state()
Isn't the fact that the former updates the MSI message data without
updating the copy of it in memory a problem for the latter, i.e. won't
the latter restore stale information? While the problem (if there is one)
existed before c/s 20073, the fact that the vector now can change
seems to make the potential effect of this much worse.
Thanks, Jan
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
|
|
| |
|
Home