> >>
> >> So you continue using pausing, and I continue to miss the argumentation
> >> of why you can't do without (even if previously the discussion was for
> >> patch 4, but it obviously applies here as well).
> >
> > I think this case is slightly different. Here we need to call
> >
>>> On 28.09.16 at 08:50, wrote:
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Jan Beulich [mailto:jbeul...@suse.com]
>> Sent: Monday, September 26, 2016 7:47 PM
>> To: Wu, Feng
>> Cc: andrew.coop...@citrix.com; dario.faggi...@citrix.com;
>>
> -Original Message-
> From: Jan Beulich [mailto:jbeul...@suse.com]
> Sent: Monday, September 26, 2016 7:47 PM
> To: Wu, Feng
> Cc: andrew.coop...@citrix.com; dario.faggi...@citrix.com;
> george.dun...@eu.citrix.com; Tian, Kevin ; xen-
>
>>> On 21.09.16 at 04:37, wrote:
> +static void vmx_pi_list_cleanup(struct vcpu *v)
> +{
> +vmx_pi_list_remove(v);
> +}
Please avoid such a no-op wrapper - the caller can easily call
vmx_pi_list_remove() directly.
> @@ -215,13 +225,28 @@ void vmx_pi_hooks_assign(struct
This patch handles some concern cases when the last assigned device
is removed from the domain. In this case we should carefully handle
pi descriptor and the per-cpu blocking list, to make sure:
- all the PI descriptor are in the right state when next time a
devices is assigned to the domain