Message ID | 1477731601-10926-5-git-send-email-roger.pau@citrix.com (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
State | New, archived |
Headers | show |
>>> On 29.10.16 at 10:59, <roger.pau@citrix.com> wrote: > It doesn't make sense since the idle domain doesn't receive any events. This > is relevant in order to be sure that hypercall_preempt_check is not called > by the idle domain, which would happen previously when calling > {hap/sh}_set_allocation during domain 0 creation. AIUI this describes the state of things before this series, not before this patch. I wonder whether this wouldn't better be folded into the previous patch, with the commit message slightly adjusted. Jan
diff --git a/xen/include/asm-x86/event.h b/xen/include/asm-x86/event.h index a82062e..d589d6f 100644 --- a/xen/include/asm-x86/event.h +++ b/xen/include/asm-x86/event.h @@ -23,6 +23,9 @@ int hvm_local_events_need_delivery(struct vcpu *v); static inline int local_events_need_delivery(void) { struct vcpu *v = current; + + ASSERT(!is_idle_vcpu(v)); + return (has_hvm_container_vcpu(v) ? hvm_local_events_need_delivery(v) : (vcpu_info(v, evtchn_upcall_pending) && !vcpu_info(v, evtchn_upcall_mask)));
It doesn't make sense since the idle domain doesn't receive any events. This is relevant in order to be sure that hypercall_preempt_check is not called by the idle domain, which would happen previously when calling {hap/sh}_set_allocation during domain 0 creation. Signed-off-by: Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@citrix.com> --- Cc: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> Cc: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com> --- Changes since v2: - Expand commit message. --- xen/include/asm-x86/event.h | 3 +++ 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)