2017-07-03 15:30 GMT+08:00 Paolo Bonzini <[email protected]>: > > > On 02/07/2017 03:56, Wanpeng Li wrote: >>>> - if (!apic_lvtt_period(apic) && atomic_read(&ktimer->pending)) >>>> + if (!apic_lvtt_period(apic) && (r || >>>> atomic_read(&ktimer->pending))) { >>>> + if (r) >>>> + apic_timer_expired(apic); >>>> return false; >>>> + } >>> >>> This logic is not the same as in my v4 >>> http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg1434040.html >>> . You return false for the expired timer and actually it will switch >>> to sw timer. >> >> Ah, I miss read it, the rebase is correct. > > Yeah, I'm not entirely satisfied with it but it's working: start_sw > timer will see ktimer->pending and do nothing. > > But thinking more about it, maybe the "if (r)" can be omitted > completely? We need to benchmark it but it can be done.
"if (r)" makes codes more understandable, in addition, calling expired the pending timer here looks weird though ktimer->pending. Regards, Wanpeng Li
