[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <3ba4a711-ac8b-46aa-b585-51c8b9881c8c@email.android.com>
Date: Wed, 02 Feb 2011 18:35:44 -0800
From: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
To: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
CC: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>,
Kees Cook <kees.cook@...onical.com>,
matthieu castet <castet.matthieu@...e.fr>,
Linux Kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Subject: Re: [BUG] broken ebba638ae723d8a8fc2f7abce5ec18b688b791d7
Can we completely kill the "don't reload segments" flag, then?
"Rusty Russell" <rusty@...tcorp.com.au> wrote:
>On Thu, 3 Feb 2011 11:49:36 am Rusty Russell wrote:
>> On Thu, 3 Feb 2011 09:18:21 am H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> > On 01/28/2011 08:58 AM, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
>> > > On 01/27/2011 07:38 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> > >> [Adding Jeremy]
>> > >>
>> > >> Jeremy, would this break Xen? As far as I know, Xen is the main
>user
>> > >> of skipping segment register initialization.
>> > >
>> > > Xen doesn't go through head_*.S at all.
>> > >
>> >
>> > OK, I guess it's actually lguest which needs this feature?
>>
>> Well, we already move __BOOT_DS into every other segment reg, so I
>don't think
>> %ss will break...
>>
>> Checking...
>
>Fine here.
>
>Thanks,
>Rusty.
>PS. In general, I don't want lguest to interfere with cleanups: I'd
>rather
> fix up lguest as required until it gets too hard, then kill it.
--
Sent from my mobile phone. Please pardon any lack of formatting.
--
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