Re: [Xen-devel] Commit moratorium for branching Xen 4.9

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 01.06.17 at 19:57, <julien.grall@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On 26/05/17 07:02, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>> On 25.05.17 at 20:00, <boris.ostrovsky@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> On 05/25/2017 01:46 PM, Julien Grall wrote:
>>>> On 25/05/17 18:08, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
>>>>> Is this:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://lists.xenproject.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2017-05/msg02340.html
>>>>>  
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> being deferred to the next RC (if we are having one)?
>>>>
>>>> I missed that issue sorry. So far, this patch lacks of
>>>> Acked-by/Reviewed-by but as a Tested-by.
>>>>
>>>> I am aware the patch that introduced the regression (efa9596e9d
>>>> "x86/mm: fix incorrect unmapping of 2MB and 1GB pages") was attempting
>>>> to prevent breaking down an EPT structure irreversibly when removing
>>>> 2MB and 1GB pages. AFAIU, this commit will improve performance, but a
>>>> boot regression was introduced on AMD platforms.
>>>
>>>
>>> The regression only affects AMD guests that have maxmem > memory.
>>>
>>> Since we have a fix in flight my suggestion would be to release-note
>>> this issue but not revert the offending patch.
>>
>> I'm pretty convinced we can get this sorted before 4.9 goes out,
>> so +1 to not reverting right away. I'm not even sure is we may
>> notice this in osstest, as I'm uncertain whether there are any
>> tests with maxmem > memory.
> 
> I haven't seen any update on this patch. Shall we make a release note 
> about the regression or will it be fixed for Xen 4.9?

I've committed this one to master a minute ago; would need your
ack for 4.9. Would also need your ack for pulling over "x86/HVM:
correct notion of new CPL in task switch emulation".

Jan


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