Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4] x86/apicv: fix RTC periodic timer and apicv issue

["Xuquan (Quan Xu)" <xuquan8@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On December 22, 2016 4:12 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 21.12.16 at 06:44, <xuquan8@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/vmx/intr.c
>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/vmx/intr.c
>> @@ -315,9 +315,13 @@ void vmx_intr_assist(void)
>>          * Set eoi_exit_bitmap for periodic timer interrup to cause
>EOI-induced VM
>>          * exit, then pending periodic time interrups have the chance
>to be injected
>>          * for compensation
>> +        * Set eoi_exit_bitmap for intack.vector when it's higher than
>pending
>> +        * periodic time interrupts. This way we can guarantee there's
>always a chance
>> +        * to post periodic time interrupts when periodic time
>interrupts becomes the
>> +        * highest one
>>          */
>>          if (pt_vector != -1)
>> -            vmx_set_eoi_exit_bitmap(v, pt_vector);
>> +            vmx_set_eoi_exit_bitmap(v, intack.vector);
>
>The comment does not clarify why max(pt_vector, intack.vector) is not
>needed. And I'd expect you to add ASSERT(intack.vector >= pt_vector) then,
>to prove this (and one might argue that this addition could be sufficient
>documentation, albeit perhaps a brief comment next to the assertion
>would help readers of this non-trivial piece of code).
>
Kevin or Jan..
ASSERT(...) is ok to me.. Could you help me give a brief comment? 

Quan



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