On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 04:47:40PM +0000, Christoffer Dall wrote: > On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 10:15 AM, Will Deacon <will.deacon@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > At this point, VM1 is running and VM0:VCPU1 is running. VM0:VCPU0 is not > > running because physical CPU0 is handling an interrupt. The problem is that > > when VCPU0 *is* resumed, it will update the VMID of VM0 and could be > > scheduled in parallel with VCPU1 but with a different VMID. > > > > How do you avoid this in the current code? > > > I don't. Nice catch. Please apply your interesting brain to the following fix:) I'm far too sober to look at your patch right now, but I'll think about it over the weekend [I can't break it at a quick glance] :) In the meantime, can you think about whether the TLB operations need to run on every CPU please? Will -- 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
