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

Re: [Xen-devel] arch_set_info_guest() producing inconsistent state on x86?


  • To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@xxxxxxxxxx>, "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • From: Keir Fraser <keir.xen@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2011 13:01:28 +0100
  • Cc:
  • Delivery-date: Tue, 29 Mar 2011 05:03:37 -0700
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=user-agent:date:subject:from:to:message-id:thread-topic :thread-index:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=h0iXSWWTnhia1tlbEKwQIrJw2eb7aTHRD5TLlIhDfRwTSYWiJw2PQwnzx1aif4qR7g Sytyp0Yy67Imqf/rxXrASqg2DuQAX7Um5upoG0pNqfInSQfuBck2hckRfBGzcjJkgmqJ E7xVSmgGbi//iV+rCPuXzvNGN9OXMVtoXyBrc=
  • List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
  • Thread-index: AcvuCQjN5ctjchqMEk+IlJPZ/C/M3w==
  • Thread-topic: [Xen-devel] arch_set_info_guest() producing inconsistent state on x86?

On 29/03/2011 12:45, "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>> It's probably used by debuggers running in dom0? Also see
>> modify_returncode() in libxc/xc_resume.c -- so it's used on suspend resume
>> in the failure case.
>> 
>> I doubt anything other than GPRs are ever modified after first
>> initialisation.
> 
> So should we then perhaps make the function check the bits
> it doesn't really update match what is in place already?

I suppose it would be nice. I can't say I care much one way or the other.

 -- Keir



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


 


Rackspace

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