From: Glauber de O. C. <gc...@re...> - 2007-11-13 11:52:56
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Dong, Eddie escreveu: >> +static void kvm_write_guest_time(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) +{ >> + struct timespec ts; >> + int r; >> + >> + if (!vcpu->clock_gpa) >> + return; >> + >> + /* Updates version to the next odd number, indicating >> we're writing */ >> + vcpu->hv_clock.version++; >> + kvm_write_guest(vcpu->kvm, vcpu->clock_gpa, >> &vcpu->hv_clock, PAGE_SIZE); >> + >> + kvm_get_msr(vcpu, MSR_IA32_TIME_STAMP_COUNTER, >> + &vcpu->hv_clock.last_tsc); >> + >> + ktime_get_ts(&ts); > > Do we need to disable preemption here? After thinking for a little while, you are theoretically right. In the current state, we could even be preempted between all operations ;-) Maybe after avi's suggestion of moving the call to it it will end up in a preempt safe region, but anyway, it's safer to add the preempt markers here. I'll put it in next version, thanks -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Remi - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFHOZBrjYI8LaFUWXMRAo81AKCfbkzhLl7F6BUjzUHVyErCFeHxFACg1teB eqsOnJiAqB3JiYf+2YdMZ4o= =ENKU -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |