From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Keir Fraser Subject: Re: [PATCH] xen: fix initialization of wallclock time for PVHVM on migration Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2013 17:12:43 +0100 Message-ID: References: <51B74971.4020104@citrix.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: In-Reply-To: <51B74971.4020104@citrix.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Roger Pau =?ISO-8859-1?B?TW9ubuk=?= Cc: George Dunlap , Jan Beulich , xen-devel@lists.xen.org List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 11/06/2013 16:59, "Roger Pau Monn=E9" wrote: >> Hmm I can't find any confirmation that my patch actually *did* work. :( = I'm >> sure I remember testing it though! >> = >> My suggestion is we do indeed remove the inner if() in latch_shinfo_size= (). >> Ie. Call update_domain_wallclock_time() even if shinfo size has apparent= ly >> not changed. = >> = >> We only latch shinfo size on hypercall page initialisation and on setup = of >> the callback irq. They are start-of-day/resume operations, so removing t= he >> if() should have no bad side effect that I can see. If nothing else it >> should make this wallclock-field setup more robust. > = > So it would be better to call update_domain_wallclock_time > unconditionally on latch_shinfo_size rather than doing it on > XENMAPSPACE_shared_info? > = > Conceptially it makes more sense IMHO to do it in the call to > XENMAPSPACE_shared_info. I would still make the fix in latch_shinfo_size() and perhaps add an extra call to latch_shinfo_size() from the call to XENMAPSPACE_shared_info. But actually I am sure you will find it unnecessary and at this point for Xen 4.3 I think the smallest possible patch wins. -- Keir