|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
xen-devel
Re: [Xen-devel] current not very current (vs curr_vcpu)
On 25/02/2010 01:06, "Mukesh Rathor" <mukesh.rathor@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Okay, see how xen-unstable:20969 works for you.
>
>
> Yup, better. Thanks a lot.
>
> BTW, since debuggers only care about BUG and ASSERT, perhaps
> DEBUGGER_trap_entry could be moved after BUGFRAME_warn, next time
> you are in do_invalid_op().
DEBUGGER_trap_entry is done early in all trap handlers. There are
DEBUGGER_trap_fatal hooks in the ASSERT and BUG paths already which can be
hooked in preference. The place to express that policy is in the debugger.h
header or the debugger itself. And I think it already is done correctly.
-- Keir
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
<Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread> |
- Re: [Xen-devel] current not very current (vs curr_vcpu), (continued)
- Re: [Xen-devel] current not very current (vs curr_vcpu), Mukesh Rathor
- Re: [Xen-devel] current not very current (vs curr_vcpu), Keir Fraser
- Re: [Xen-devel] current not very current (vs curr_vcpu), Mukesh Rathor
- Re: [Xen-devel] current not very current (vs curr_vcpu), Keir Fraser
- Re: [Xen-devel] current not very current (vs curr_vcpu), Mukesh Rathor
- Re: [Xen-devel] current not very current (vs curr_vcpu), Mukesh Rathor
- Re: [Xen-devel] current not very current (vs curr_vcpu), Keir Fraser
- Re: [Xen-devel] current not very current (vs curr_vcpu), Mukesh Rathor
- Re: [Xen-devel] current not very current (vs curr_vcpu), Keir Fraser
- Re: [Xen-devel] current not very current (vs curr_vcpu), Mukesh Rathor
- Re: [Xen-devel] current not very current (vs curr_vcpu),
Keir Fraser <=
|
|
|
|
|