[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [V9 PATCH 7/8] pvh dom0: check for vioapic null ptr in vioapic_range
On Wed, 23 Apr 2014 10:07:25 +0100 "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>> On 23.04.14 at 02:11, <mukesh.rathor@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, 22 Apr 2014 08:33:29 +0100 > > "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> >>> On 22.04.14 at 02:59, <mukesh.rathor@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: ...... > > So it must have been the third one that I had observed the > > vioapic_range crash in a while ago, and had made note of it. > > Looking at it: > > > > if ( (p2mt == p2m_mmio_dm) || > > (access_w && (p2mt == p2m_ram_ro)) ) > > { > > put_gfn(p2m->domain, gfn); > > if ( !handle_mmio() ) > > > > doesn't seem apply to domu. Unfortunately, I can't reproduce it now > > so maybe it was an ept violation due to some bug, and a crash in > > vioapic_range before printing the gfn/mfns etc by > > ept_handle_violation made me make a note to put a check in it. > > Which makes me think that we don't need the patch at all. Well, without this patch, in case of dom0 EPT violation, dom0 will not die gracefully printing gfn/mfn/etc.. info. But instead it will show fault in vioapic_range. ept_handle_violation() hvm_hap_nested_page_fault() -> handle_mmio() -----> vioapic_range() : KABOOM!! gdprintk(XENLOG_ERR, "EPT violation %#lx (%c%c%c/%c%c%c), " "gpa %#"PRIpaddr", mfn %#lx, type %i.\n", qualification, <=== NOT REACHED ....... I can submit it later too I guess. But without it, we'd not know the ept violation crashes. thanks mukesh _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |