| |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
xen-devel
Re: [Xen-devel] RE: [PATCH] x86: add CMCI software injection interface
|
To: |
"Jiang, Yunhong" <yunhong.jiang@xxxxxxxxx>, Frank Van Der Linden <frank.van.der.linden@xxxxxxxxxx>, "Ke, Liping" <liping.ke@xxxxxxxxx> |
|
Subject: |
Re: [Xen-devel] RE: [PATCH] x86: add CMCI software injection interface |
|
From: |
Keir Fraser <keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|
Date: |
Wed, 5 May 2010 10:20:37 +0100 |
|
Cc: |
"Christoph@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <Christoph@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Egger <Christoph.Egger@xxxxxxx>, "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "gavin.maltby@xxxxxxxxxx" <gavin.maltby@xxxxxxxxxx> |
|
Delivery-date: |
Wed, 05 May 2010 02:21:31 -0700 |
|
Envelope-to: |
www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
|
In-reply-to: |
<789F9655DD1B8F43B48D77C5D30659731E417C5C@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|
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: |
AcrsBoN8fQDW68zYTYmNSmTGX2PBrwAFER8wAAVuQH8AABeUcAAA1mXh |
|
Thread-topic: |
[Xen-devel] RE: [PATCH] x86: add CMCI software injection interface |
|
User-agent: |
Microsoft-Entourage/12.24.0.100205 |
On 05/05/2010 10:07, "Jiang, Yunhong" <yunhong.jiang@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> If going with the former option it would be good to think ahead in your
>> designs and make sure you end up adding the smallest possible number of new
>> XEN_MC_* commands. It could easily become a real mess I'm sure.
>
> "either of these"? Maybe I didn't express my idea clearly. I didn't propose
> two options. I just suggest to use a new command for this purpose. And we can
> update the version number if needed.
>
> BTW, as currently Xen already will return -EINVAL for not-support command
> (i.e. <= 5), maybe the version number update is not needed. ( the -EINVAL may
> be not good as -ENOSYS).
Oh, sorry, I thought you were expressing either-or. If you add a new command
then you do not update the version number: that would pointlessly disable
MCE on older guests.
-- Keir
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
|
|
| |
|
Home