On 16.03.22 19:38, Raphael Ning wrote:
> From: Raphael Ning <raphning@amazon.com>
> 
> Currently, evtchn_fifo_set_pending() will mark the event as PENDING even
> if it fails to lock the FIFO event queue(s), or if the guest has not
> initialized the FIFO control block for the target vCPU. A well-behaved
> guest should never trigger either of these cases.

Is this true even for the resume case e.g. after a migration?

The guests starts on the new host with no FIFO control block for any
vcpu registered, so couldn't an event get lost with your patch in case
it was sent before the target vcpu's control block gets registered?


Juergen