On 14/12/2015 16:33, Andrey Smetanin wrote: > It's possible that guest send us Hyper-V EOM at the middle > of Hyper-V SynIC timer running, so we start processing of Hyper-V > SynIC timers in vcpu context and stop the Hyper-V SynIC timer > uncoditionally and lose time expiration which Windows 2012R2 guest > expects. > > The patch fixes such situation by not stopping Hyper-V SynIC timer > at all, because it's safe to restart it without stop in vcpu context > and timer callback always returns HRTIMER_NORESTART.
Can you summarize with a "picture" what is the bad race? The patch seems safe, but I'd like to have a better understanding of what goes wrong. Paolo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
