[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100122092127.GB7127@in.ibm.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2010 14:51:27 +0530
From: "K.Prasad" <prasad@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@...mens.com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
Subject: Re: [RFC Patch 2/2][Bugfix][x86][hw-breakpoint] Fix return-code to
notifier chain in hw_breakpoint_handler
On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 10:14:54AM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> K.Prasad wrote:
> > On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 01:10:58AM +0530, K.Prasad wrote:
> >> On Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 08:15:29PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> >>> Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> >>>> On Fri, Jan 01, 2010 at 12:32:17AM +0530, K.Prasad wrote:
> >>>>> On Thu, Dec 31, 2009 at 01:38:09AM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> >>>>>> On Sat, Dec 26, 2009 at 11:58:33PM +0530, K.Prasad wrote:
> >>>>>>> The hw-breakpoint handler will return NOTIFY_DONE for user-space breakpoints
> >>>>>>> to generate SIGTRAP signal (and not for kernel-space addresses).
> >>>>>>>
<snipped>
> >> Such a behaviour shouldn't be affected by the above change...your
> >> confirmation would help!
> >>
> >
> > Hi Jan,
> > I presume that the above explanation makes the role of this
> > patch/bugfix clear.
> >
> > Kindly let me know if you have any further queries.
> >
>
> Nope. There should be really no conflicts of your optimization with kvm.
>
> Jan
>
> --
Hi Jan,
Thanks for the confirmation.
Hi Frederic,
Can you pull these fixes in? (LKML references:
20091226182725.GB9494@...ibm.com and 20091226182833.GC9494@...ibm.com).
Thanks,
K.Prasad
--
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