Re: [Xen-devel] [xen-unstable bisection] complete test-amd64-i386-qemuu-rhel6hvm-amd

[Keir Fraser <keir@xxxxxxx>]

On 17/10/2012 10:21, "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

>> Perhaps we reverted before because we decided that this advertised table
>> size was a bug, and handling it just opened us to other bugs lurking in the
>> table?
> 
> As just said in the response to Ian - originally, only a spec violating
> vale was accepted here, whereas with the change we also accept
> the proper value. The patch itself was prompted by a bug report
> we got that on a spec conformant system the "ERST table is invalid"
> message was seen.

Oh dear!

 K.



_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel