From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.1 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 85CC2C433E0 for ; Tue, 9 Mar 2021 09:06:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BCF664F73 for ; Tue, 9 Mar 2021 09:06:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229637AbhCIJFn (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Mar 2021 04:05:43 -0500 Received: from esa5.hc3370-68.iphmx.com ([216.71.155.168]:35948 "EHLO esa5.hc3370-68.iphmx.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229544AbhCIJFM (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Mar 2021 04:05:12 -0500 X-Greylist: delayed 427 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Tue, 09 Mar 2021 04:05:12 EST DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=citrix.com; s=securemail; t=1615280712; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date: mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ucEyClNY7Tik8Yk7WI9RZer5oJR2JMMqQHVmFQC9FDE=; b=QVONzvvlN7I7XsaRYUQCGNmh2ULqBq9zQrA/TQ0S0pkRkKnWaTW8SCrZ gj/21jE5kFIp2NMtw2vpwEMoosCY/AHJUiydPKRfTf4V1VlPDFtZB45HP AASZbA5TUuSthGPTvhPSpBuxjn/L6gxGBBuaXLPfAyVJj3/KEYOGIutr8 w=; Authentication-Results: esa5.hc3370-68.iphmx.com; dkim=none (message not signed) header.i=none IronPort-SDR: ifhYFTrHtVgd68c/XUGtBuHNjVRWo6LfOxF3XIc6nQNmeHSBls/AkrbJ89p6twz1cYS0qfTMYE 8tm4S8oS6YFEHMWGJKuMwDAScH2anoCglpbi60qWwpVBQcBGKwPYm/A0aEeGbZ0OfFdfGCxVHB vTkzH4T5pVvmrmdoHlz1NFEYy/WZD59qZSW6ilFF8vw6GqX2T6sJmQVlPCrcKpYXvQI3Netdin SS2On1Z3Azsqs9QyW25t8LjPLwIcVK1udb23wbHb6LXikGmvqMqYehSQ5PxdYJL3zywqd/12FN xtU= X-SBRS: 4.0 X-MesageID: 38751923 X-Ironport-Server: esa5.hc3370-68.iphmx.com X-Remote-IP: 162.221.158.21 X-Policy: $RELAYED X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.81,234,1610427600"; d="scan'208";a="38751923" Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] xen/events: don't unmask an event channel when an eoi is pending To: =?UTF-8?B?SsO8cmdlbiBHcm/Dnw==?= , Boris Ostrovsky , , CC: Stefano Stabellini , , Julien Grall , Julien Grall References: <20210306161833.4552-1-jgross@suse.com> <20210306161833.4552-3-jgross@suse.com> From: Ross Lagerwall Message-ID: Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2021 08:57:23 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.7.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 2021-03-09 05:14, Jürgen Groß wrote: > On 08.03.21 21:33, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: >> >> On 3/6/21 11:18 AM, Juergen Gross wrote: >>> An event channel should be kept masked when an eoi is pending for it. >>> When being migrated to another cpu it might be unmasked, though. >>> >>> In order to avoid this keep three different flags for each event channel >>> to be able to distinguish "normal" masking/unmasking from eoi related >>> masking/unmasking and temporary masking. The event channel should only >>> be able to generate an interrupt if all flags are cleared. >>> >>> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org >>> Fixes: 54c9de89895e0a36047 ("xen/events: add a new late EOI evtchn framework") >>> Reported-by: Julien Grall >>> Signed-off-by: Juergen Gross >>> Reviewed-by: Julien Grall >>> --- >>> V2: >>> - introduce a lock around masking/unmasking >>> - merge patch 3 into this one (Jan Beulich) >>> V4: >>> - don't set eoi masking flag in lateeoi_mask_ack_dynirq() >> >> >> Reviewed-by: Boris Ostrovsky >> >> >> Ross, are you planning to test this? > > Just as another data point: With the previous version of the patches > a reboot loop of a guest needed max 33 reboots to loose network in > my tests (those were IIRC 6 test runs). With this patch version I > stopped the test after about 1300 reboots without having seen any > problems. > Thanks, I'll test it today and get back to you. Ross