From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Keir Fraser <keir.xen@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: don't write_tsc() non-zero values on
	CPUs updating only the lower 32 bits
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2011 07:40:00 +0100
Message-ID: <C9CDA6D0.16614%keir.xen@gmail.com>
References: <7a5514b0-b3d6-478a-9434-b80758a7445d@default>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com>
In-Reply-To: <7a5514b0-b3d6-478a-9434-b80758a7445d@default>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com
To: Dan Magenheimer <dan.magenheimer@oracle.com>, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@novell.com>
Cc: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com, "winston.l.wang" <winston.l.wang@intel.com>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On 14/04/2011 23:41, "Dan Magenheimer" <dan.magenheimer@oracle.com> wrote:

>> Yeah, if we want to continue to try avoiding write_tsc() on
>> TSC_RELIABLE
>> then we should assert !TSC_RELIABLE on the write_tsc() path in
>> cstate_tsc_restore().
> 
> Agreed.  In fact, maybe it should be asserted in write_tsc?

We still write_tsc on CPU physical hot-add.

 -- Keir