[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <be8c1972398e45890e9a528db70e468872093b5d.camel@infradead.org>
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2024 20:07:34 +0000
From: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
To: paul@....org, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>, Jonathan Corbet
<corbet@....net>, Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>, 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,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 00/20] KVM: xen: update shared_info and vcpu_info
handling
On Thu, 2024-01-25 at 15:03 +0000, Paul Durrant wrote:
> On 15/01/2024 12:56, Paul Durrant wrote:
> > From: Paul Durrant <pdurrant@...zon.com>
> >
> > This series has one small fix to what was in v11 [1]:
> >
> > * KVM: xen: re-initialize shared_info if guest (32/64-bit) mode is set
> >
> > The v11 patch failed to set the return code of the ioctl if the mode
> > was not actually changed, leading to a spurious failure.
> >
> > This version of the series also contains a new bug-fix to the pfncache
> > code from David Woodhouse.
> >
> > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/kvm/20231219161109.1318-1-paul@xen.org/
> >
>
> Ping?
>
I think it's only the final patch which is controversial, isn't it? We
can drop that for now and I can submit it under separate cover.
It'll be basically the same patch, just won't claim to be a bug fix:
https://lore.kernel.org/kvm/6dc0e9d1f5db41a053b734b29403ad48c288dea3.camel@infradead.org/
Although I'll eat my hat if that "should never happen" bug actually
does keep happening after the locking is less baroque.
Download attachment "smime.p7s" of type "application/pkcs7-signature" (5965 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists