From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Gleb Natapov <gleb@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] Hyper-H reference counter
Date: Mon, 20 May 2013 11:36:48 +0300
Message-ID: <20130520083648.GP4725@redhat.com>
References: <1368445517-5496-2-git-send-email-vrozenfe@redhat.com>
 <20130516083450.GM26453@redhat.com>
 <1368695621.18400.9.camel@localhost>
 <20130516092128.GP26453@redhat.com>
 <1368696535.18400.10.camel@localhost>
 <5194E2D3.3080300@redhat.com>
 <1368714390.18400.13.camel@localhost>
 <5194F0F8.9070205@redhat.com>
 <1368945475.1859.2.camel@localhost>
 <5199D952.2020808@redhat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: Vadim Rozenfeld <vrozenfe@redhat.com>, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
	mtosatti@redhat.com, pl@dlh.net
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Return-path: <kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:21285 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1753538Ab3ETIgx (ORCPT <rfc822;kvm@vger.kernel.org>);
	Mon, 20 May 2013 04:36:53 -0400
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <5199D952.2020808@redhat.com>
Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <kvm.vger.kernel.org>

On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 10:05:38AM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 19/05/2013 08:37, Vadim Rozenfeld ha scritto:
> > On Thu, 2013-05-16 at 16:45 +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> >> Il 16/05/2013 16:26, Vadim Rozenfeld ha scritto:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Yes, I have this check added in the second patch.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Move it here please.
> >>>>>>> OK, will do it.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Or better, remove all the handling of HV_X64_MSR_REFERENCE_TSC from this
> >>>>> patch, and leave it all to the second.
> >>>>>
> >>> What for? Could you please elaborate?
> >
> > To make code reviewable.  Add one MSR here, the other in the second patch.
> > removing HV_X64_MSR_REFERENCE_TSC will make this particular patch
> > completely non-functional.
> 
> Do you mean Windows guest will BSOD or just that they won't use the
> reference TSC?  If the latter, it's not a problem.
> 
I think it is. If reference counter works without TSC we have a bisect
point for the case when something will going wrong with TSC.

--
			Gleb.