On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 11:25:46AM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote: <snip> > >> >> > else if (kvm_cpu_has_interrupt(vcpu) || > >> req_int_win) > >> >> > kvm_x86_ops->enable_irq_window(vcpu); > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> What about the check in inject_pending_events()? > >> >> > >> >Didn't we decide that this check is not a problem? Worst that can happen > >> >is NMI injection will be delayed till next exit. > >> > >> Could be very far in the future. > >> > >Next host interrupt. But with tickles host and guest yeah. > > > > esp. important with NMI, which may be used in a situation where your > tick (and everything else) are dead.
Well the host must be alive. So eventually NMI will be delivered to the guest, but not closely matching guest visible clocks. What is the problem with that? The race should be rare enough to not interfere with NMI watchdog-like things? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
