[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] Relax assertion in VRAM tracking code

To: "Tim Deegan" <Tim.Deegan@xxxxxxxxxx>
From: "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2009 11:26:41 +0000
Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivery-date: Mon, 23 Nov 2009 03:27:08 -0800
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>

>>> Tim Deegan <Tim.Deegan@xxxxxxxxxx> 16.11.09 18:00 >>>
>The original assertion is too strict, as it includes the A/D bits of the 
>PTE, which (by design) can change under our feet.
>
>Signed-off-by: Tim Deegan <Tim.Deegan@xxxxxxxxxx>

Wouldn't the comparison a few lines down from the ASSERT() thus fixed
also benefit from a similar adjustment?

Jan


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] Relax assertion in VRAM tracking code
  - From: Tim Deegan

References:
- [Xen-devel] [PATCH] Relax assertion in VRAM tracking code
  - From: Tim Deegan

Prev by Date: Re: [Xen-devel] Question about linear mapping of shadow page tables for 64bit HVM guest
Next by Date: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] Relax assertion in VRAM tracking code
Previous by thread: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] Relax assertion in VRAM tracking code
Next by thread: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] Relax assertion in VRAM tracking code
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.