[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] x86/xen: remove xen_have_vcpu_info_placement flag
- To: Juergen Gross <jgross@xxxxxxxx>, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, x86@xxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- From: Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2021 10:09:55 -0400
- Arc-authentication-results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=oracle.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=oracle.com; dkim=pass header.d=oracle.com; arc=none
- Arc-message-signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=jkDtPb1T0sU5FbY+CiYBQbSOYKSIUZIPL2BFDe0J36I=; b=M8SjOf+KMU9W7gKJeusdvDMT8lARc0zkiJE/4cDw2W8VTrEs9ci52yV1Jr5CBfgXnMIlMzKyEPYbpKn3yZr9gIoX7btIdMJ/32HLen5+BDHStJJLFc3JEeVw0rH42QeBvRwt0GcvwEfzAz2qjqc6haQdXkjDctmBCvjRyyhZ384XEKXEir8oIzcDzE1JXRIkHhE2pFWw5J5rW9XrF13cekm4DzuVF2ewITR2eSlH4FcLqDAQx7us8ga/c/ayiVShTzbe7RwClqzSYecB1J5fo6Rw3J4dd+WeVSC3Wc/4JWRcGm0Txu2APhsVAU+KV4fKwxvFUfphy3RkAiGj4aV03g==
- Arc-seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=ZrSV/1aAySU3Z21yZRq3db2wvQnABx6rJeBDeXDPu+0JaG5ahHdwTxR5Uf+/Vm9C+HZB7QoMlMJY9FnttiawI5A84kwxN+ik3pF+RDzRk2GCl14T1aM/uUZYxKHj5j9t8nT8IOZgJJh9g6Cw+8EFiIM8PDOvaSiObaN8jy3WzlTU++LjBXphuH2JY51glF7/IkEAMNgVZ/Xm4YyH+DWCeY1vImskYgwbVi6aZSmtQjT0Hv87lKqDizfkRs65tYC8I/iEjRj7RyP/nSxjRYhfvA0CjrlIuQ0B5B9fwdYQr/9l7O9LTbCbhM012HQYbyBKvfP6VnHJaWUzmmFyLVjInA==
- Authentication-results: zytor.com; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;zytor.com; dmarc=none action=none header.from=oracle.com;
- Cc: peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx>, Borislav Petkov <bp@xxxxxxxxx>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@xxxxxxxxx>
- Delivery-date: Thu, 23 Sep 2021 14:10:35 +0000
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>
On 9/23/21 12:44 AM, Juergen Gross wrote:
>
> Hmm, maybe I should have been more explicit saying that the hypercall
> was introduced in Xen 3.4, and only reason of failure is either an
> illegal vcpu, an invalid mapping specification, or a try to reissue the
> hypercall for a vcpu. None of those should ever happen.
>
That last sentence -- famous last words ;-) But yes, sure.
Assuming both patches adjust their commit messages and the typo
Reviewed-by: Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@xxxxxxxxxx>
|
