Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v3] x86/HVM: Fix teardown ordering in hvm_vcpu_destroy()

[Suravee Suthikulpanit <Suravee.Suthikulpanit@xxxxxxx>]

On 1/10/17 21:26, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 10/01/17 14:15, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> > On 10/01/17 14:03, Suravee Suthikulpanit wrote:
> > > The order of destroy function calls in hvm_vcpu_destroy() should be
> > > the reverse of init calls in hvm_vcpu_initialise().
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Suravee Suthikulpanit <suravee.suthikulpanit@xxxxxxx>
> > > Reviewed-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Reviewed-by: Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > Cc: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
> > > Cc: Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Reviewed-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx> and queued.
> Wait no.
>
> The order in vcpu_initialise is
>
> hvm_vcpu_cacheattr_init()
> vlapic_init()
> hvm_funcs.vcpu_initialise()
> softirq_tasklet_init()
> setup_compat_arg_xlat()
>
> Therefore, moving the tasklet_kill() is wrong.
>
> The overall delta should be:
>
> andrewcoop@andrewcoop:/local/xen.git/xen$ git diff HEAD^
> diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c
> index 4c0f561..9f74334 100644
> --- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c
> @@ -1626,12 +1626,12 @@ void hvm_vcpu_destroy(struct vcpu *v)
>      free_compat_arg_xlat(v);
>
>      tasklet_kill(&v->arch.hvm_vcpu.assert_evtchn_irq_tasklet);
> -    hvm_vcpu_cacheattr_destroy(v);
> +    hvm_funcs.vcpu_destroy(v);
>
>      if ( is_hvm_vcpu(v) )
>          vlapic_destroy(v);
>
> -    hvm_funcs.vcpu_destroy(v);
> +    hvm_vcpu_cacheattr_destroy(v);
>  }
>
> IIRC.
>
> If you agree, I will fold this correction in while committing.
>
> ~Andrew
Ah, right... sorry I missed the tasklet stuff.

Thanks,
Suravee

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