On 09/03/2011 14:45, "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> From looking at the code I cannot deduce why it wouldn't be possible
> for hpet_interrupt_handler() or hpet_legacy_irq_tick() to be called
> while hpet_broadcast_init() is still executing. If that's indeed possible,
> then the setting of .event_handler clearly has to happen *after*
> initializing the channel's spinlock and rwlock.
>
> Further, with the channel getting enabled (down the
> hpet_fsb_cap_lookup() call tree) before hpet_events[] gets fully
> initialized, I'd also think it should be possible to hit the spurious
> warning in hpet_interrupt_handler() just because of improper
> initialization order.
>
> If that's all impossible in practice, adding some meaningful
> comments to the code to describe why this is so would be much
> appreciated.
Only someone at Intel could answer these questions. Cc'ing Yu Ke, who seems
most involved in this aspect.
 -- Keir
> Thanks, Jan
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-devel mailing list
> Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel 
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel