On 2013-04-28 12:19, Gleb Natapov wrote: > On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 12:15:05PM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote: >> On 2013-03-17 09:47, Gleb Natapov wrote: >>> On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 09:49:07PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote: >>>> From: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@xxxxxxxxxxx> >>>> >>>> If the guest didn't take the last APIC timer interrupt yet and generates >>>> another one on top, e.g. via periodic mode, we do not block the VCPU >>>> even if the guest state is halted. The reason is that >>>> apic_has_pending_timer continues to return a non-zero value. >>>> >>>> Fix this busy loop by taking the IRR content for the LVT vector in >>>> apic_has_pending_timer into account. >>>> >>> Just drop coalescing tacking for lapic interrupt. After posted interrupt >>> will be merged __apic_accept_irq() will not longer return coalescing >>> information, so the code will be dead anyway. >> >> If I understood the follow-up discussion correctly, we aren't dropping >> de-coalescing support yet. So how to proceed with this fix here? >> > We do. It does not work if you run on CPU with apicv support already. But isn't the code still there and working when apicv is absent? Jan
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
