[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4A04503E.3050807@goop.org>
Date: Fri, 08 May 2009 08:31:10 -0700
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
CC: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@...ell.com>,
the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Xen-devel <xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 2/5] xen/x86-64: clean up warnings aboutIST-using
traps
Ingo Molnar wrote:
> Yes. Also, patches 1-2-3 really just do the same thing, one fixes
> the other one. Would be nice to have a single patch for that whole
> ugly topic of 64-bit Xen not handling ISTs properly.
>
Well, 1 is sufficient on its own to fix the breakpoint/watchpoint
problem. Looks like I need to do something similar with stack. The 2,3
are more general cleanups that aren't essential to the functional fix,
and should definitely be folded together.
> If this was a CPU we'd say "sorry, dont run Linux on it then" ...
>
?? Guests don't really need IST because all the tricky traps that
really require it (NMI, MCE, etc) are handled by Xen. The stack
exception was an oversight on my part, because I thought it was
something that would only happen with a bad kernel stack (but I guess
that's doublefault).
> I've applied the reservation fix to x86/urgent, and the #5 patch to
> x86/xen (it's more of a cleanup, not a fix for .30, right?).
>
Right.
J
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists