Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 2/6] VMX: Properly handle pi when all the assigned devices are removed

2016-09-28 Thread Wu, Feng
> >> > >> 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 > >

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 2/6] VMX: Properly handle pi when all the assigned devices are removed

2016-09-28 Thread Jan Beulich
>>> 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; >>

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 2/6] VMX: Properly handle pi when all the assigned devices are removed

2016-09-28 Thread Wu, Feng
> -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- >

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 2/6] VMX: Properly handle pi when all the assigned devices are removed

2016-09-26 Thread Jan Beulich
>>> 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

[Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 2/6] VMX: Properly handle pi when all the assigned devices are removed

2016-09-20 Thread Feng Wu
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