> >>
> >> Not if it's masked by WIE -- and even when masked by CE, it's a bug
> >> that we currently consider the vcpu runnable. We shouldn't depend on that
> bug.
> >
> > Scott can you please describe what is bug?
>
> If an interrupt is masked by EE, CE, ME, etc. it is still in pending_exceptions,
> so runnable still returns true, and we can't go idle.
Hmm, ok.
>
> > What I remember is that if
> > vcpu is not run-able then we halt vcpu and cannot cause qemu exit
> > also.
>
> I agree that we want to be considered runnable if we have a final expiration
> with an action. What I disagree with is using the same pending_exceptions bit
> as is used for the ordinary watchdog interrupt.
> They're not the same thing.
Now I agree with your disagreement :)
Thanks
-Bharat
��.n��������+%������w��{.n�����o�^n�r������&��z�ޗ�zf���h���~����������_��+v���)ߣ�
