This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
Home Products Support Community News


Re: [Xen-devel] arch_set_info_guest() producing inconsistent state on x8

To: "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] arch_set_info_guest() producing inconsistent state on x86?
From: "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2011 12:45:38 +0100
Cc: Keir Fraser <keir.xen@xxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Tue, 29 Mar 2011 04:45:35 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <C9B76C02.15827%keir.xen@xxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <4D91AE140200007800038CF7@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <C9B76C02.15827%keir.xen@xxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> On 29.03.11 at 11:59, Keir Fraser <keir.xen@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 29/03/2011 09:01, "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> The question is whether it must be considered legal to issue
>> XEN_DOMCTL_setvcpucontext on an already initialized vCPU
>> in the first place.
> It's probably used by debuggers running in dom0? Also see
> modify_returncode() in libxc/xc_resume.c -- so it's used on suspend resume
> in the failure case.
> I doubt anything other than GPRs are ever modified after first
> initialisation.

So should we then perhaps make the function check the bits
it doesn't really update match what is in place already?


Xen-devel mailing list