From: "Laszlo Ersek" <lersek@redhat.com>
To: devel@edk2.groups.io, igor.druzhinin@citrix.com,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: jordan.l.justen@intel.com, ard.biesheuvel@arm.com,
anthony.perard@citrix.com, julien@xen.org,
Ray Ni <ray.ni@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH] OvmfPkg: End timer interrupt later to avoid stack overflow under load
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2020 14:10:52 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <58b6a1c7-10ad-ec54-545e-ab17ec3e2aa3@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5f9198c8-b89d-a313-8237-5178af9cf484@citrix.com>
On 06/17/20 19:23, Igor Druzhinin wrote:
> On 17/06/2020 17:59, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> [CAUTION - EXTERNAL EMAIL] DO NOT reply, click links, or open attachments unless you have verified the sender and know the content is safe.
>>
>> 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 <pbonzini@redhat.com>
>
> Thanks, unfortunately it's not possible to move DisableInterrupts inside
> TPL block as RestoreTPL would immediately enable them according to current
> logic.
>
> IMO RaiseTPL could technically save interrupt state inside it (in that
> case it was disabled) and then honor it in RestoreTPL but that might have
> more surprise consequences than the proposed change I reckon.
>
> I will create a BZ ticket as requested.
Merged via <https://github.com/tianocore/edk2/pull/709> as commit
239b50a86370, with the following updates:
[lersek@redhat.com: add BZ ref; rewrap msg to silence PatchCheck.py]
Thanks!
Laszlo
prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-06-18 12:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-06-16 2:49 [PATCH] OvmfPkg: End timer interrupt later to avoid stack overflow under load Igor Druzhinin
2020-06-16 18:42 ` Laszlo Ersek
2020-06-17 3:16 ` Igor Druzhinin
2020-06-17 12:44 ` Laszlo Ersek
2020-06-17 13:51 ` Paolo Bonzini
2020-06-17 15:46 ` Laszlo Ersek
2020-06-17 16:59 ` Paolo Bonzini
2020-06-17 17:23 ` Igor Druzhinin
2020-06-18 8:36 ` Laszlo Ersek
2020-06-18 8:44 ` Laszlo Ersek
2020-06-18 12:10 ` Laszlo Ersek [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-list from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=58b6a1c7-10ad-ec54-545e-ab17ec3e2aa3@redhat.com \
--to=devel@edk2.groups.io \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox