From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from us-smtp-1.mimecast.com (us-smtp-1.mimecast.com [205.139.110.120]) by mx.groups.io with SMTP id smtpd.web10.287.1592413171376620866 for ; Wed, 17 Jun 2020 09:59:31 -0700 Authentication-Results: mx.groups.io; dkim=pass header.i=@redhat.com header.s=mimecast20190719 header.b=g4ACwy6q; spf=pass (domain: redhat.com, ip: 205.139.110.120, mailfrom: pbonzini@redhat.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1592413170; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=Mc3t0LuY/6LT2UCUVTQTSytZeEQa1y1BaWfOHnI+EgQ=; b=g4ACwy6qrgiVeEIbWJ/dxake4IcWBrajE8JUXZ5PwA7NhFj0H94noF9ezWvxGagq9wnbx6 HKP9ru7DTvstwPrj0AcORVK3YkfCF6JKwvLauB9D7BWCv4Uyssu7bUgtZC2pWGCZJgb0U9 NLFYhV3ddzit3EMCvg894wRFdgdrGf4= Received: from mail-wm1-f72.google.com (mail-wm1-f72.google.com [209.85.128.72]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-212-aMg8auY0OKWC_TZ0o-nlGg-1; Wed, 17 Jun 2020 12:59:27 -0400 X-MC-Unique: aMg8auY0OKWC_TZ0o-nlGg-1 Received: by mail-wm1-f72.google.com with SMTP id c66so1483608wma.8 for ; Wed, 17 Jun 2020 09:59:26 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=Mc3t0LuY/6LT2UCUVTQTSytZeEQa1y1BaWfOHnI+EgQ=; b=ChxMVpCgna/a3NnyDuxd4KBPACoKVbmnV4BAHDCdY/PtDckVGa0vhjjemvPqNIEftQ cWFAsh9Qh5+HwXCcWWsUBY1cToarqT03+y6/y6kJkXDvUlN4czRolO8vExFsRN/6JbjK 0Ev4iIMqJcw/xOuc/Kofr0o4TP6K9d7vbR5dRIFjHoFCvzD+SKzfareCqxhDKNaJnxMX ZKbjZ4Hm7H8+eiSGSrfNUvUlJ9Zy8jEvOeGA7JBe6Z4SAwHrS1kbHtxTD0eZW8yp393P agroduHbqO9GoJTlkg5pzpgg7a4UneVJZ1MsoiPzE/WuXbwQZJEzJ86EoBz+KSuzEiXK LQaA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532pRq3cQr6MF5ZzrlgHt8D6x0tNubjFz9H4V33zZlMJ5HE24FOY QYXROL47sx4SC8di+7KbBj53G2/SAELOjtcQCjjYzCM+galU2mQyEzU6F1Dwi2Pyi/Eylc5hVT5 CZYwsHzm3xBkISQ== X-Received: by 2002:adf:8b18:: with SMTP id n24mr209796wra.372.1592413165676; Wed, 17 Jun 2020 09:59:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxnOQsQKB9fehJygX1w3zFAYvo1rOQgehYqF5RZdi3vJdaO5IC6LTvFe8gaXAn1X9+POnVLlw== X-Received: by 2002:adf:8b18:: with SMTP id n24mr209781wra.372.1592413165457; Wed, 17 Jun 2020 09:59:25 -0700 (PDT) Return-Path: Received: from ?IPv6:2001:b07:6468:f312:48a4:82f8:2ffd:ec67? ([2001:b07:6468:f312:48a4:82f8:2ffd:ec67]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id r4sm221657wro.32.2020.06.17.09.59.24 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 17 Jun 2020 09:59:24 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH] OvmfPkg: End timer interrupt later to avoid stack overflow under load To: Laszlo Ersek , Igor Druzhinin , devel@edk2.groups.io Cc: jordan.l.justen@intel.com, ard.biesheuvel@arm.com, anthony.perard@citrix.com, julien@xen.org, Ray Ni References: <1592275782-9369-1-git-send-email-igor.druzhinin@citrix.com> <1d4cd50f-9479-0361-2d23-edda83037243@redhat.com> <8f885a46-f72b-bf13-db55-28e6db8b5bff@redhat.com> From: "Paolo Bonzini" Message-ID: <291ce7e8-c1ce-df38-de48-e39671c9c894@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2020 18:59:24 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <8f885a46-f72b-bf13-db55-28e6db8b5bff@redhat.com> X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 17/06/20 17:46, Laszlo Ersek wrote: >> That said, Igor's patch seems correct to me. In fact, I'd even move >> DisableInterrupts before gBS->RestoreTPL unless there's a good reason >> not to do so. > OK, thank you! > > Igor, please confirm if you'd like to submit v2 with the update > suggested by Paolo, or if you prefer the current version. We're at the > beginning of the current development cycle, so I guess we can apply the > patch and see how it works in practice. If it ends up wreaking havoc on > some platforms, we can always revert the patch in time for the next > stable tag (edk2-stable202008). For what it's worth "correct" means that I don't see anything that could break and in fact I find it good policy hygienic not to allow recursive interrupts. v1 is okay for me too, so: Reviewed-by: Paolo Bonzini Paolo