Re: [PATCH v2] xen/arm: implement GICD_I[S/C]ACTIVER reads

[Julien Grall <julien@xxxxxxx>]

On 03/04/2020 17:18, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> On Fri, 3 Apr 2020, Marc Zyngier wrote:
 > Doing what my patch here does might be OK until one of these guests
> start to rely on ISACTIVER to be accurate. So far I have not seen any
> examples of it, but I agree it could happen, hence, it is risky.
I am only going to answer to this. This is not about *accuracy* but 
deadlock in your guest. I actually wrote a long e-mail on this thread 
explaining the possible deadlock.
It is not because you can't reproduce the deadlock that the dealock is 
not there. When are you going to stop dimissing real bug in your 
implementation?
Cheers,

--
Julien Grall