On 2012-07-05 12:10, liu ping fan wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 2:46 PM, Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@xxxxxx> wrote:
>> On 2012-07-05 04:18, Liu Ping Fan wrote:
>>> Vcpu state must be set completely before receiving INIT-IPI,SIPI
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Liu Ping Fan <pingfank@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>> kvm.h | 1 +
>>> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/kvm.h b/kvm.h
>>> index 9c7b0ea..5b3c228 100644
>>> --- a/kvm.h
>>> +++ b/kvm.h
>>> @@ -198,6 +198,7 @@ static inline void cpu_synchronize_post_init(CPUArchState *env)
>>> {
>>> if (kvm_enabled()) {
>>> kvm_cpu_synchronize_post_init(env);
>>> + smp_wmb();
>>> }
>>> }
>>>
>>>
>>
>> In theory, there should be no vcpu kick-off after this without some
>> locking operations involved that imply barriers. Did you see real
>
> Yeah, but what if it is non-x86?
The locking I'm referring to is arch independent.
>> inconsistencies without this explicit one?
Again: Did you see real issues or is this based on static analysis?
Jan
--
Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT RTC ITP SDP-DE
Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
