>>> On 13.05.19 at 16:45, wrote:
> On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 08:19:04AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> >>> On 13.05.19 at 15:48, wrote:
>> > On Wed, May 08, 2019 at 07:10:59AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> >> --- a/xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/iommu.c
>> >> +++ b/xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/iommu.c
>>
On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 08:19:04AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 13.05.19 at 15:48, wrote:
> > On Wed, May 08, 2019 at 07:10:59AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >> --- a/xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/iommu.c
> >> +++ b/xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/iommu.c
> >> @@ -2134,11 +2134,16 @@ static void
>>> On 13.05.19 at 15:48, wrote:
> On Wed, May 08, 2019 at 07:10:59AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> --- a/xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/iommu.c
>> +++ b/xen/drivers/passthrough/vtd/iommu.c
>> @@ -2134,11 +2134,16 @@ static void adjust_irq_affinity(struct a
>> unsigned int node = rhsa ?
On Wed, May 08, 2019 at 07:10:59AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> All of __{assign,bind,clear}_irq_vector() manipulate struct irq_desc
> fields, and hence ought to be called with the descriptor lock held in
> addition to vector_lock. This is currently the case for only
> set_desc_affinity() (in the
> From: Jan Beulich [mailto:jbeul...@suse.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 8, 2019 9:16 PM
>
> >>> On 08.05.19 at 15:10, wrote:
> > All of __{assign,bind,clear}_irq_vector() manipulate struct irq_desc
> > fields, and hence ought to be called with the descriptor lock held in
> > addition to
>>> On 08.05.19 at 15:10, wrote:
> All of __{assign,bind,clear}_irq_vector() manipulate struct irq_desc
> fields, and hence ought to be called with the descriptor lock held in
> addition to vector_lock. This is currently the case for only
> set_desc_affinity() (in the common case) and
