Re: [Xen-devel] [xen-unstable test] 11574: tolerable FAIL

[Tim Deegan <tim@xxxxxxx>]

At 17:44 +0000 on 24 Jan (1327427040), Ian Jackson wrote:
> Tim Deegan writes ("Re: [Xen-devel] [xen-unstable test] 11574: tolerable 
> FAIL"):
> > At 16:00 +0000 on 24 Jan (1327420844), Ian Jackson wrote:
> > Hmm, Didn't have to pull on that thread too hard to find it's not tied
> > to anything.  The access_* arguments to hvm_hap_nested_page_fault()
> > aren't plumbed in on AMD:
> > 
> >     ret = hvm_hap_nested_page_fault(gpa, 0, ~0ul, 0, 0, 0, 0);
> > 
> > so gating behaviour on them is not going to work so well.  Sorry about
> > that - I should definitely have caught this.  (But Andres, did you test
> > this, or any of your mm work, on AMD?)
> 
> In general it's probably unrealistic to ask every submitter to test
> every patch on two different systems...

True.

> > The attached patch ought to fix it.  Smoke-tested but I won't have
> > good enough access to my test machines to check Windows installs before
> > Thursday. 
> 
> I'd be quite happy if this patch went into -unstable right away.  We
> should be able to tell from the automatic tests whether it is awful
> :-) and the current situation is rather poor.

Done.

Cheers,

Tim.

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