Displaying 3 results from an estimated 3 matches for "lapic_restore".
2019 Jul 15
3
[PATCH v2] x86/paravirt: Drop {read,write}_cr8() hooks
On 15/07/2019 19:17, Nadav Amit wrote:
>> On Jul 15, 2019, at 8:16 AM, Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3 at citrix.com> wrote:
>>
>> There is a lot of infrastructure for functionality which is used
>> exclusively in __{save,restore}_processor_state() on the suspend/resume
>> path.
>>
>> cr8 is an alias of APIC_TASKPRI, and APIC_TASKPRI is saved/restored
2019 Jul 15
3
[PATCH v2] x86/paravirt: Drop {read,write}_cr8() hooks
On 15/07/2019 19:17, Nadav Amit wrote:
>> On Jul 15, 2019, at 8:16 AM, Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3 at citrix.com> wrote:
>>
>> There is a lot of infrastructure for functionality which is used
>> exclusively in __{save,restore}_processor_state() on the suspend/resume
>> path.
>>
>> cr8 is an alias of APIC_TASKPRI, and APIC_TASKPRI is saved/restored
2019 Jul 16
0
[PATCH v2] x86/paravirt: Drop {read,write}_cr8() hooks
...e fixed on commit. Whichever
> is easiest.
>
I don't see anything wrong with the message. If we actually used CR8
for interrupt priorities, we wouldn't want it to serialize. The bug
is that the code that did the write_cr8() should have had a comment as
to how it serialized against lapic_restore(). But that doesn't seem
worth mentioning in the message, since, as noted, the real problem was
that it nonsensically restored just TPR without restoring everything
else.