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 v2] xen: x86_32: do not enable iterrupts when ret

To: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2] xen: x86_32: do not enable iterrupts when returning from exception in interrupt context
From: Igor Mammedov <imammedo@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 02 Sep 2011 11:19:29 +0200
Delivery-date: Fri, 02 Sep 2011 02:20:47 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <1314877615-18280-1-git-send-email-imammedo@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/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>
References: <4E5EB794.7050909@xxxxxxxx> <1314877615-18280-1-git-send-email-imammedo@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.20) Gecko/20110805 Red Hat/3.1.12-1.el6_1 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.12
BTW, while debugging this issue, I've tried to print saved_upcall_mask
inside xen when handling page fault from guest. And it value is always
0. Looking at asm code for example in xen/arch/x86/x86_32/entry.S:382

        movzwl TRAPBOUNCE_cs(%edx),%eax 
               ^^^^^ upper 16-bit is 0 set in propagate_page_fault
                     by "tb->cs         = ti->cs;"

        /* Null selectors (0-3) are not allowed. */
        testl $~3,%eax
        jz   domain_crash_synchronous
        movl %eax,UREGS_cs+4(%esp)
                  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ and here is the only place we set
                  saved_upcall_mask field in current cpu_user_regs

It looks like "saved_upcall_mask" in cpu_user_regs is not really used
any more for what it means and it's presence in struct is just confusing
and misleading.

So why not delete it and extend _pad1 to 4 bytes?


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