xen-devel

[Top] [All Lists]

[Xen-devel] [PATCH] fix regression from c/s 23735:537918f518ee

from [Jan Beulich]

[Permanent Link][Original]

To:	"xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject:	[Xen-devel] [PATCH] fix regression from c/s 23735:537918f518ee
From:	"Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date:	Mon, 25 Jul 2011 09:49:20 +0100
Delivery-date:	Mon, 25 Jul 2011 01:50:08 -0700
Envelope-to:	www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
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

This was checking presence of the wrong (old) ELF note. I don't really
understand how this failed consistently only for one of the xen-boot
tests...

Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxxxx>

--- a/xen/arch/ia64/xen/domain.c
+++ b/xen/arch/ia64/xen/domain.c
@@ -2164,7 +2164,7 @@ int __init construct_dom0(struct domain 
                return -1;
        }
 
-       if (parms.elf_notes[XEN_ELFNOTE_FEATURES].type != XEN_ENT_NONE &&
+       if (parms.elf_notes[XEN_ELFNOTE_SUPPORTED_FEATURES].type != 
XEN_ENT_NONE &&
            !test_bit(XENFEAT_dom0, parms.f_supported))
        {
                printk("Kernel does not support Dom0 operation\n");
--- a/xen/arch/x86/domain_build.c
+++ b/xen/arch/x86/domain_build.c
@@ -415,7 +415,7 @@ int __init construct_dom0(
         return -EINVAL;
     }
 
-    if ( parms.elf_notes[XEN_ELFNOTE_FEATURES].type != XEN_ENT_NONE &&
+    if ( parms.elf_notes[XEN_ELFNOTE_SUPPORTED_FEATURES].type != XEN_ENT_NONE 
&&
          !test_bit(XENFEAT_dom0, parms.f_supported) )
     {
         printk("Kernel does not support Dom0 operation\n");

guest-dom0-cap-fix.patch
Description: Text document

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

[More with this subject...]

<Prev in Thread]	Current Thread	[Next in Thread>
[Xen-devel] [PATCH] fix regression from c/s 23735:537918f518ee, Jan Beulich <=

Previous by Date:	RE: [Xen-users] Can one VCPU use all physical CPUs in the host, Zary Matej
Next by Date:	Re: [Xen-devel] hanging tapdisk2 processes and improper udev rules, Andreas Olsowski
Previous by Thread:	[Xen-devel] [xen-unstable test] 8270: regressions - trouble: broken/fail/pass, xen . org
Next by Thread:	[Xen-devel] [PATCH] linux-2.6.18/x86: replace order-based range checking of M2P table by linear one, Jan Beulich
Indexes:	[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]