[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150317075139.GA27898@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2015 08:51:39 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc: Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@...hat.com>,
linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
keescook@...omium.org, ast@...mgrid.com, fweisbec@...il.com,
oleg@...hat.com, tglx@...utronix.de, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
hpa@...or.com, wad@...omium.org, rostedt@...dmis.org
Subject: Re: [tip:x86/asm] x86/asm/entry/64: Remove unused
thread_struct::usersp
* Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org> wrote:
> Assuming this does not fix the regression, could you apply the
> minimal patch below - which reverts the old_rsp handling change.
Assuming this solves the regression (it really should, it's now
equivalent to a full revert minus comments):
> @@ -395,6 +398,8 @@ __switch_to(struct task_struct *prev_p, struct task_struct *next_p)
> /*
> * Switch the PDA and FPU contexts.
> */
> + prev->usersp = this_cpu_read(old_rsp);
> + this_cpu_write(old_rsp, next->usersp);
> this_cpu_write(current_task, next_p);
>
> /*
can you confirm that your guest (sometimes) uses SYSENTER to do
syscalls?
If yes then my theory is that we broke SYSENTER (or SYSEXIT) support -
and that this would not be visible in our normal tests of KVM because
SYSCALL is used most of the time.
Thanks,
Ingo
--
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