[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <SA1PR11MB6734A92B97F4A4A51AE3CCCEA809A@SA1PR11MB6734.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2023 17:19:45 +0000
From: "Li, Xin3" <xin3.li@...el.com>
To: "andrew.cooper3@...rix.com" <andrew.cooper3@...rix.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org" <xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org>
CC: "Lutomirski, Andy" <luto@...nel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
"H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
"Gross, Jurgen" <jgross@...e.com>,
"Ostrovsky, Boris" <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>
Subject: RE: [RFC PATCH 1/1] x86/traps: Get rid of exception handlers' second
argument error code
> On 04/08/2023 8:57 am, Xin Li wrote:
> > I haven't checked Xen implications with this change, i.e., does Xen
> > hypervisor need to adjust how it passes arguments to PV guests?
>
> This is an internal detail of how Linux handles data on it's stacks, isn't it?
Yes, it is completely internal to Linux.
> The Xen code in Linux will need adjustment to match, but this is not a hypervisor
> ABI (which obviously can't and won't change).
You're right! Thanks for confirming!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists