RE: [Xen-devel] [PATCH]Make VTIdomain boot again

RE: [Xen-devel] [PATCH]Make VTIdomain boot again

[Dong, Eddie]

Keir Fraser wrote:
> On 9 Feb 2006, at 09:32, Xu, Anthony wrote:
> 
>> Do_softirq is invoked at the path of ia64_leave_kernel instead of
>> being invoking in function irq_exit, which is aligned with XEN/X86
>> and avoids __enter_schedule being reentered. VTIdomain can boot
>> again after applying this patch. 
>> 
>> BTW, a small bug is fixed.
>> - (p6)	br.call.sptk.many b0=deliver_pending_interrupt
>> +(pUStk)	br.call.sptk.many b0=deliver_pending_interrupt
>> Since P6 is scratch register, after returning from
>> deliver_pending_interrupt, p6 may be changed. But p6 is also used by
>> subsequent code and should not be changed.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by Anthony Xu <anthony.xu@intel.com>
> 
> Should I check in this patch instead of your earlier one (which used
> xen_irq_exit instead or irq_exit?).
> 
>   -- Keir
Keir:
	This are 2 seperate one, so please check in both if possible.
thx,eddie

RE: [Xen-devel] [PATCH]Make VTIdomain boot again

[Alex Williamson]

On Thu, 2006-02-09 at 22:33 +0800, Dong, Eddie wrote:
> > 
> > Should I check in this patch instead of your earlier one (which used
> > xen_irq_exit instead or irq_exit?).
> > 
> >   -- Keir
> Keir:
> 	This are 2 seperate one, so please check in both if possible.

   I'm confused, these patches are completely overlapping, aren't they?
We can't do both.  Thanks,

	Alex

-- 
Alex Williamson                             HP Linux & Open Source Lab

Re: [Xen-ia64-devel] [PATCH]Make VTIdomain boot again

[Keir Fraser]

On 9 Feb 2006, at 15:17, Alex Williamson wrote:

>> 	This are 2 seperate one, so please check in both if possible.
>
>    I'm confused, these patches are completely overlapping, aren't they?
> We can't do both.  Thanks,

As I noticed when I just checked them both in. Looks to me as though 
the second is the preferable cleaner one, so I checked it in on top of 
the first one.

As you say, it's probably best for you to do any further cleanup in the 
ia64-unstable tree. :-)

  -- Keir