Re: [Xen-devel] [xen-unstable test] 104131: regressions - FAIL

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 16.01.17 at 06:25, <kevin.tian@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> One thing noted though. The original patch from Quan is actually orthogonal
> to this ASSERT. Regardless of whether intack.vector is larger or smaller
> than pt_vector, we always require the trick as long as pt_vector is not the
> one being currently programmed to RVI.

I don't think the ASSERT() addition is orthogonal: It exchanges
intack.vector for pt_vector in the invocation of
vmx_set_eoi_exit_bitmap(), and during discussion of the patch
there at least intermediately was max() of the two used instead.
It was - iirc - one of you who suggested that the use of max()
there is unnecessary, which the ASSERT() triggering has now
shown is wrong.

> Then do we want to revert the whole
> commit until the problem is finally fixed, or OK to just remove ASSERT 
> (or replace with WARN_ON with more debug info) to unblock test system
> before the fix is ready?

Well, as the VMX maintainer I think the proposal of whether to
revert or wait should really come from you.

Jan


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