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-ia64-devel

Re: [Xen-ia64-devel][Patch]Add two PAL calls which fix SMPwindowsinstall

Tristan Gingold writes:
 > > In 10, I don't understand why the special SAL_XEN_SAL_RETURN is
 > > necessary instead of PAL_HALT. The difference is test_and_set_bit() or
 > > set_bit(). I think a vcpu with VCPU_down state never be at this point.
 > > Besides calling vcpu_sleep_no_sync() with VCPU_down state seems to be
 > > harmless.
 > Humm, to be discussed:
 > Although the implementation may be almost the same, I think the semantic is
 > not.
 > After SAL_XEN_SAL_RETURN, the processor can be awaken only by a rendez-vous.
 > Its state is reset.
 > 
 > After PAL_HALT, the processor can be awaken by an IPI. Its state is 
 > preserved.
 > 
 > Tristan.

I see. For example, preserving a vcpu context is unnecessary after
SAL_XEN_SAL_RETURN for save/restore of a domain.

Thanks,
Kouya


_______________________________________________
Xen-ia64-devel mailing list
Xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ia64-devel

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