On 05/11/16 at 04:24P, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > > On 30/04/2016 23:57, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > >> > Should we kill __pvclock_read_cycles in favor of vread_pvclock? It looks > >> > doable at a quick scan... > >> > > > The in-kernel version might have to be a bit different because it > > needs to handle the !stable case. If !stable, it should just use the > > current CPU's copy which means that, realistically, it should just > > get_cpu and use the local copy unconditionally. Other than that, it > > could look a lot like the vread_pvclock variant. > > > > But I agree, the current thing is incomprehensible. > > It also lacks smp_rmb()s. One is more or less implicit in rdtsc, but > you need one to separate __pvclock_read_cycles's reads of src->foo from > pvclock_read_flags's read of src->version. > > Minfei, would you like to take a look?
Sure. I will take a look about this issue. Thanks Minfei > > Paolo
