Re: [PATCH v11 5/5] xen/arm: account for stolen ticks

[Mark Rutland]

On Fri, Nov 06, 2015 at 11:41:49AM +0000, David Vrabel wrote:
> On 06/11/15 11:39, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > On Thu, 5 Nov 2015, Mark Rutland wrote:
> >>>  static void xen_percpu_init(void)
> >>>  {
> >>>  	struct vcpu_register_vcpu_info info;
> >>> @@ -104,6 +120,8 @@ static void xen_percpu_init(void)
> >>>  	BUG_ON(err);
> >>>  	per_cpu(xen_vcpu, cpu) = vcpup;
> >>>  
> >>> +	xen_setup_runstate_info(cpu);
> >>
> >> Does the runstate memory area get unregsitered when a kernel tears
> >> things down, or is kexec somehow inhibited for xen guests?
> >>
> >> i couldn't spot either happening, but I may have missed it.
> > 
> > I don't think that the runstate memory area needs to be unregistered for
> > kexec, but I am not very knowledgeble on kexec and Xen, CC'ing Vitaly
> > and David.
> 
> There's a whole pile of other state needing to be reset for kexec (event
> channels and grant tables for example).  The guest needs to soft reset
> itself (available in Xen 4.6) before kexec'ing another kernel.
> 
> This soft reset would also including cleaning up this shared memory region.

Ok. So we don't currently have the code kernel-side, but it looks like
it would be relatively simple to add (having just spotted [1]), and
everything should be ready on the Xen side.`

Thanks,
Mark.

[1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/9/25/152
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/