Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH RFC 27/31] xen/x86: Rework Intel masking/faulting setup

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 22.01.16 at 15:09, <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 22/01/16 09:40, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>> On 16.12.15 at 22:24, <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> @@ -183,22 +237,13 @@ static void early_init_intel(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
>>>         (boot_cpu_data.x86_mask == 3 || boot_cpu_data.x86_mask == 4))
>>>             paddr_bits = 36;
>>>  
>>> -   if (c == &boot_cpu_data && c->x86 == 6) {
>>> -           if (probe_intel_cpuid_faulting())
>>> -                   __set_bit(X86_FEATURE_CPUID_FAULTING,
>>> -                             c->x86_capability);
>>> -   } else if (boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_CPUID_FAULTING)) {
>>> -           BUG_ON(!probe_intel_cpuid_faulting());
>>> -           __set_bit(X86_FEATURE_CPUID_FAULTING, c->x86_capability);
>>> -   }
>>> +   if (c == &boot_cpu_data)
>>> +           intel_init_levelling();
>>> +
>>> +   if (test_bit(X86_FEATURE_CPUID_FAULTING, boot_cpu_data.x86_capability))
>>> +            __set_bit(X86_FEATURE_CPUID_FAULTING, c->x86_capability);
>> So you intentionally delete the validation of CPUID faulting being
>> available on APs?
> 
> Yes.  All this does is change where Xen crashes, in the case that AP's
> have different capabilities to the BSP, and allows more startup code to
> move into __init.

So where did that Xen crash point move to (since I didn't spot it)?

Jan


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