Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen/arm: introduce platform_need_explicit_eoi

[Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, 30 Jun 2014, Julien Grall wrote:
> On 06/27/2014 04:51 PM, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > On Mon, 2014-06-23 at 11:43 +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> >> I thought about this concurrency problem and I think I managed to
> >> solve it correctly. The solution I used was introducing a new flag
> >> called "GIC_IRQ_GUEST_MIGRATING". See:
> >>
> >> 1402504032-13267-4-git-send-email-stefano.stabellini@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > 
> > So, I'm not sure whether I should apply this patch now or wait for that
> > series to go in first. What should I do?
> 
> IIRC, I've asked Stefano to rewrote a bit the following paragraph.
> 
> "
> > No need to find the pcpu that needs to write to GICC_DIR, because after
> > "physical irq follow virtual irq" we always inject the virtual irq on
> > the vcpu that is running on the pcpu that received the interrupt.
> "
> 
> The "physical irq follow virtual irq" is part of the migration series
> but this is not the reason that make GICC_DIR working. This is GIC
> specific (even though, I can't find a clearly define behavior in the
> specification).

Yes, I'll rewrite and resend.

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