Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen: arm: increase priority of SGIs used as IPIs

[Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, 2014-03-17 at 11:36 +0000, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Mon, 2014-03-17 at 11:34 +0000, Julien Grall wrote:
> > Hi Ian,
> > 
> > On 03/17/2014 11:29 AM, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2014-03-17 at 10:02 +0000, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > >> On Sun, 2014-03-16 at 16:38 +0000, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > >>> On Thu, 13 Mar 2014, Oleksandr Tyshchenko wrote:
> > >>>> Hello, all.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> I tested this patch (with debug patch) when I was looking for solution
> > >>>> to fix "simultaneous cross-interrupts" (see 1.1):
> > >>>> http://lists.xenproject.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2014-01/msg02685.html
> > >>>> This patch didn't fix my issue.
> > >>>> When the solution was founded I forgot about this patch)
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Now I am using next solution:
> > >>>> http://marc.info/?l=xen-devel&m=139153089412362&w=2
> > >>>
> > >>> Speaking of which, it should probably be applied to xen-unstable now
> > >>> that the gate is open?
> > >>
> > >> Julien acked it but had a couple of minor comments which I wanted to
> > >> address today. I hope to repost later on.
> > > 
> > > Oh you meant the route irqs to dom0 patch in the link not the one in
> > > this thread. I'll pick that one up today as well I hope.
> > 
> > With the IPI patch, I don't think we need the route irqs to CPU0 patch
> > (at least for Xen 4.5). It would be better to backport it for Xen 4.4.
> 
> Oleksndr said above that the IPI patch didn't help but the CPU0 one did.
> But rereading I wonder if I am misinterpreting what was said.

Because of this uncertainty I'm going to wait for confirmation of what
is going on before I apply "xen/arm: route irqs to cpu0".

Ian.


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel