Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH tip/core/rcu 02/20] x86: Use common outgoing-CPU-notification code

["Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, Mar 03, 2015 at 02:17:24PM -0500, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
> On 03/03/2015 12:42 PM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> >  }
> >@@ -511,7 +508,8 @@ static void xen_cpu_die(unsigned int cpu)
> >             schedule_timeout(HZ/10);
> >     }
> >-    cpu_die_common(cpu);
> >+    (void)cpu_wait_death(cpu, 5);
> >+    /* FIXME: Are the below calls really safe in case of timeout? */
> 
> 
> Not for HVM guests (PV guests will only reach this point after
> target cpu has been marked as down by the hypervisor).
> 
> We need at least to have a message similar to what native_cpu_die()
> prints on cpu_wait_death() failure. And I think we should not call
> the two routines below (three, actually --- there is also
> xen_teardown_timer() below, which is not part of the diff).
> 
> -boris
> 
> 
> >     xen_smp_intr_free(cpu);
> >     xen_uninit_lock_cpu(cpu);

So something like this, then?

        if (cpu_wait_death(cpu, 5)) {
                xen_smp_intr_free(cpu);
                xen_uninit_lock_cpu(cpu);
                xen_teardown_timer(cpu);
        }

Easy change for me to make if so!

Or do I need some other check for HVM-vs.-PV guests, and, if so, what
would that check be?  And also if so, is it OK to online a PV guest's
CPU that timed out during its previous offline?

                                                        Thanx, Paul


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