[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CALCETrW15jX9eh3fqJNzoeD6yveov6rr9NkOLqCe6fJCK_LXoA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2015 13:27:58 -0700
From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
Cc: Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Gleb Natapov <gleb@...nel.org>, kvm list <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
Ralf Baechle <ralf@...ux-mips.org>,
Andrew Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] First batch of KVM changes for 4.1
On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 9:59 AM, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com> wrote:
>
>
> On 17/04/2015 22:18, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
>> The bug which this is fixing is very rare, have no memory of a report.
>>
>> In fact, its even difficult to create a synthetic reproducer.
>
> But then why was the task migration notifier even in Jeremy's original
> code for Xen? Was it supposed to work even on non-synchronized TSC?
>
> If that's the case, then it could be reverted indeed; but then why did
> you commit this patch to 4.1? Did you think of something that would
> cause the seqcount-like protocol to fail, and that turned out not to be
> the case later? I was only following the mailing list sparsely in March.
I don't think anyone ever tried that hard to test this stuff. There
was an infinte loop that Firefox was triggering as a KVM guest
somewhat reliably until a couple months ago in the same vdso code. :(
--Andy
--
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