Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 2/2] xen: merge temporary vcpu pinning scenarios

[Juergen Gross <jgross@xxxxxxxx>]

On 23.07.19 16:14, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 23.07.2019 16:03, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > On 23.07.2019 15:44, Juergen Gross wrote:
> > > On 23.07.19 14:42, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > > > v->processor gets latched into st->processor before raising the softirq,
> > > > but can't the vCPU be moved elsewhere by the time the softirq handler
> > > > actually gains control? If that's not possible (and if it's not obvious
> > > > why, and as you can see it's not obvious to me), then I think a code
> > > > comment wants to be added there.
> > > You are right, it might be possible for the vcpu to move around.
> > >
> > > OTOH is it really important to run the target vcpu exactly on the cpu
> > > it is executing (or has last executed) at the time the NMI/MCE is being
> > > queued? This is in no way related to the cpu the MCE or NMI has been
> > > happening on. It is just a random cpu, and so it would be if we'd do the
> > > cpu selection when the softirq handler is running.
> > >
> > > One question to understand the idea nehind all that: _why_ is the vcpu
> > > pinned until it does an iret? I could understand if it would be pinned
> > > to the cpu where the NMI/MCE was happening, but this is not the case.
> > Then it was never finished or got broken, I would guess.
> Oh, no. The #MC side use has gone away in 3a91769d6e, without cleaning
> up other code. So there doesn't seem to be any such requirement anymore.
So just to be sure: you are fine for me removing the pinning for NMIs?


Juergen

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel