Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 0/4] VMX: Properly handle pi descriptor and per-cpu blocking list

2016-06-24 Thread Dario Faggioli
On Fri, 2016-06-24 at 14:49 +0100, George Dunlap wrote: > On 24/06/16 14:42, Wu, Feng wrote: > > Here is my understanding, if the guest has nothing to do, it will > > call HLT, and Xen hypervisor will call vcpu_block(), if we don't > > block the vCPU and return to guest, guest will continue to run

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 0/4] VMX: Properly handle pi descriptor and per-cpu blocking list

2016-06-24 Thread George Dunlap
On 24/06/16 14:42, Wu, Feng wrote: > > >> -Original Message- >> From: Dario Faggioli [mailto:dario.faggi...@citrix.com] >> Sent: Friday, June 24, 2016 6:29 PM >> To: Wu, Feng ; xen-devel@lists.xen.org >> Cc: k...@xen.org; Tian, Kevin ;

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 0/4] VMX: Properly handle pi descriptor and per-cpu blocking list

2016-06-24 Thread Wu, Feng
> -Original Message- > From: Dario Faggioli [mailto:dario.faggi...@citrix.com] > Sent: Friday, June 24, 2016 6:29 PM > To: Wu, Feng ; xen-devel@lists.xen.org > Cc: k...@xen.org; Tian, Kevin ; jbeul...@suse.com; > andrew.coop...@citrix.com;

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 0/4] VMX: Properly handle pi descriptor and per-cpu blocking list

2016-06-24 Thread Dario Faggioli
On Fri, 2016-06-24 at 06:33 +, Wu, Feng wrote: > > -Original Message- > > From: Dario Faggioli [mailto:dario.faggi...@citrix.com] > > In your case, AFAICUI, it's: > >  - the vCPU should block, waiting for an event > >  - the event is _not_ arrived, so we indeed should block > >  - we

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 0/4] VMX: Properly handle pi descriptor and per-cpu blocking list

2016-06-24 Thread Wu, Feng
> -Original Message- > From: Dario Faggioli [mailto:dario.faggi...@citrix.com] > Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2016 5:33 AM > To: Wu, Feng ; xen-devel@lists.xen.org > Cc: k...@xen.org; Tian, Kevin ; jbeul...@suse.com; > andrew.coop...@citrix.com;

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 0/4] VMX: Properly handle pi descriptor and per-cpu blocking list

2016-06-22 Thread Dario Faggioli
On Tue, 2016-05-31 at 10:19 +, Wu, Feng wrote: > > -Original Message- > > From: Dario Faggioli [mailto:dario.faggi...@citrix.com] > >  > > So, if you want try argumenting a bit on what was your line of > > reasoning when doing things this way, that would be helpful (at > > least > > to

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 0/4] VMX: Properly handle pi descriptor and per-cpu blocking list

2016-05-31 Thread Wu, Feng
> -Original Message- > From: Dario Faggioli [mailto:dario.faggi...@citrix.com] > Sent: Friday, May 27, 2016 1:21 AM > To: Wu, Feng ; xen-devel@lists.xen.org > Cc: k...@xen.org; Tian, Kevin ; jbeul...@suse.com; > andrew.coop...@citrix.com;

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 0/4] VMX: Properly handle pi descriptor and per-cpu blocking list

2016-05-26 Thread Dario Faggioli
Hi Feng, On Thu, 2016-05-26 at 21:39 +0800, Feng Wu wrote: > Feng Wu (4): >   VMX: Properly handle pi when all the assigned devices are removed >   VMX: Cleanup PI per-cpu blocking list when vcpu is destroyed >   VMX: Assign the right value to 'NDST' field in a concern case >   VMX: fixup PI

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 0/4] VMX: Properly handle pi descriptor and per-cpu blocking list

2016-05-26 Thread Feng Wu
The current VT-d PI related code may operate incorrectly in the following scenarios: 1. When the last assigned device is dettached from the domain, all the PI related hooks are removed then, however, the vCPU can be blocked, switched to another pCPU, etc, all without the aware of PI. After the