Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen: Improvements to domain_crash_sync()

[Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On 05/02/18 13:44, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 05.02.18 at 12:16, <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> The use of __LINE__ in a printk() is problematic for livepatching, as it
>> causes unnecessary binary differences.
>>
>> Furthermore, diagnostic information around calls is inconsistent and
>> occasionally unhelpful.  (e.g. diagnosing logs from the field which might be
>> release builds, or likely without exact source code).
>>
>> Take the opportunity to improve things.  Shorten the name to
>> domain_crash_sync() and require the user to pass a print message in.
> First of all I'd like to re-iterate that a long time ago a plan was
> formulated to entirely remove synchronous domain crashing. If I
> leave aside the three uses in wait.c (which you say you want to
> remove in its entirety anyway rather sooner than later), there
> are two other call sites. Wouldn't it therefore be more productive
> to actually get rid of those?

The asm_domain_crash_synchronous() callsite is also heading for the
axe.  I've already deleted it in my series pulling bounce frame handling
up into C.

The vmx_vmentry_failure() callsite looks like it can turn into
domain_crash() by allowing the function to return and re-enter the
softirq processing path.

Given that, I'd be happy to get rid of the domain_crash_sync()
infrastructure eventually, but given how far off the deletion patches
are, I'd still like to drop the __LINE__ reference in the short term.

~Andrew

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel