WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

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/
   
 
 
Xen 
 
Home Products Support Community News
 
   
 

xen-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] fix multicall state tracking

To: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxxxx>, <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Keir Fraser <keir@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] fix multicall state tracking
From: Keir Fraser <keir@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2006 12:25:38 +0000
Delivery-date: Thu, 14 Dec 2006 04:25:39 -0800
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <45815019.76E4.0078.0@xxxxxxxxxx>
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/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thread-index: AccfevYtNLJxvItuEdu2MgAX8io7RQ==
Thread-topic: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] fix multicall state tracking
User-agent: Microsoft-Entourage/11.2.5.060620
On 14/12/06 12:22, "Jan Beulich" <jbeulich@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> But hypercall context to me seems exactly the right context for synchronously
> crashing a domain - am I missing something here? What else (if any) do you
> consider appropriate use of this (i.e. can't it go away then altogether)?
> I'm specifically asking because I have a patch (as talked about briefly
> before,
> pending for submission after 3.0.4) to replace the BUG() stuff with a more
> Linux-like approach, which at once also puts things like WARN() and also the
> crashing of a domain into the same framework. Obviously, if you consider
> domain_crash_synchronous() use ill in general, I shouldn't introduce a
> CRASH_ME() macro here.

domain_crash() is fine, I just want to get rid of domain_crash_synchronous()
in general, except in specialised cases like entry.S. It's used lazily and
simply leads to broken error paths.

 -- Keir


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

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>