Re: [Xen-devel] arch_set_info_guest() producing inconsistent sta

To:	Jan Beulich <JBeulich@xxxxxxxxxx>, "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject:	Re: [Xen-devel] arch_set_info_guest() producing inconsistent state on x86?
From:	Keir Fraser <keir.xen@xxxxxxxxx>
Date:	Tue, 29 Mar 2011 13:05:17 +0100
Cc:
Delivery-date:	Tue, 29 Mar 2011 05:06:03 -0700
Dkim-signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:user-agent:date:subject:from:to:message-id :thread-topic:thread-index:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=lR0T4ecUyhmJtmhUniPwDaIEULnc2tiGS6oQQ8LfaBI=; b=HIz3VJcr1dw+Rxu8GwDcv0m4qEaJSvw7pIvn9ehj/MegafbMtr2P/FXEuJgo8+IGBB BOz2k8hCskvoXb81wBH95RVOFjZeLZ+yM08rnZOMRLDs7xzlRHnm95UZTyAozmaZm5dS +NYlCVRAPvXEo9nO6iS8hYN6ehgDSX6A+uOn4=
Domainkey-signature:	a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=user-agent:date:subject:from:to:message-id:thread-topic :thread-index:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; b=OojhfIRi+eMYuUyBziixVe0oJOF3zyJrPz+jalQAnvgG3CudI4GMMEpiHPdI+F2Kp6 eCjhGMpD1ASxfRuk6NDVU+CuSAPwPcHLaLAPOG283QDHaeFrt3Sp9nqOyBSoLxbRGTWc sEwOqE6QX/9XB2pYrRzhOvyHpQ2EwHVOvDRnw=
Envelope-to:	www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to:	<C9B788A8.158C5%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>
Sender:	xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thread-index:	AcvuCQjN5ctjchqMEk+IlJPZ/C/M3wAAIh/r
Thread-topic:	[Xen-devel] arch_set_info_guest() producing inconsistent state on x86?
User-agent:	Microsoft-Entourage/12.28.0.101117

On 29/03/2011 13:01, "Keir Fraser" <keir.xen@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On 29/03/2011 12:45, "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
>>> 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?
> 
> I suppose it would be nice. I can't say I care much one way or the other.

By which I mean: if you want to make the change, and do it in a way that is
clean and clear (maybe you can improve the function's readability while
there, since it is a bit of a mess) then I'll apply it happily. I don't want
to make the function even worse and more unmaintainable than it already is,
however.

 -- Keir

>  -- Keir
> 
> 

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

xen-devel

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