From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Avi Kivity Subject: Re: [PATCH 08/31] nVMX: Fix local_vcpus_link handling Date: Wed, 18 May 2011 12:16:02 +0300 Message-ID: <4DD38E52.4000303@redhat.com> References: <20110517131918.GA3809@amt.cnet> <4DD27998.1040105@redhat.com> <20110517143532.GA2490@fermat.math.technion.ac.il> <4DD2902C.9050403@redhat.com> <20110517181132.GA16262@fermat.math.technion.ac.il> <20110517184336.GA10394@amt.cnet> <20110517193030.GA21656@fermat.math.technion.ac.il> <20110517195253.GB11065@amt.cnet> <20110518055236.GA1230@fermat.math.technion.ac.il> <4DD383C6.5070001@redhat.com> <20110518090254.GA14994@fermat.math.technion.ac.il> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Marcelo Tosatti , kvm@vger.kernel.org, gleb@redhat.com To: "Nadav Har'El" Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:17883 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756731Ab1ERJQJ (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 May 2011 05:16:09 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20110518090254.GA14994@fermat.math.technion.ac.il> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 05/18/2011 12:02 PM, Nadav Har'El wrote: > On Wed, May 18, 2011, Avi Kivity wrote about "Re: [PATCH 08/31] nVMX: Fix local_vcpus_link handling": > > I did a quick audit and it seems fine. If it isn't, we'll fix it when > > we see the problem. > > Ok, then, I'm working on the code with the new approach. > > My fear was that some CPU 7 is taken down, but vcpu.cpu remains 7 (not set to > -1). If cpu 7 nevers comes up again, it's not a problem because when we run > the same vcpu again on a different cpu, it's not 7 so we do what needs to be > done on CPU switch. But, what if CPU 7 does come up again later, and we find > ourselves running again on CPU 7, but it's not the same CPU 7 and we don't > know it? Is this case at all possible? It's certainly possible, but it's independent of this patch. It's even handled, see kvm_arch_hardware_enable(). -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function