From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ian Campbell Subject: Re: [xen-unstable test] 57852: regressions - FAIL Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2015 15:08:14 +0100 Message-ID: <1433945294.30003.83.camel@citrix.com> References: <1433493915.7108.138.camel@citrix.com> <5571814C02000078000812F1@mail.emea.novell.com> <1433495266.7108.145.camel@citrix.com> <5571858C020000780008132E@mail.emea.novell.com> <1433501300.7108.208.camel@citrix.com> <557569610200007800081D4C@mail.emea.novell.com> <1433753590.7108.392.camel@citrix.com> <557579500200007800081DF0@mail.emea.novell.com> <1433755652.7108.405.camel@citrix.com> <1433765763.7108.482.camel@citrix.com> <1433838390.7108.523.camel@citrix.com> <5576CE2602000078000827F6@mail.emea.novell.com> <1433926213.30003.2.camel@citrix.com> <557821330200007800082F1C@mail.emea.novell.com> <1433934087.30003.32.camel@citrix.com> <55784041020000780008304A@mail.emea.novell.com> <1433940966.30003.81.camel@citrix.com> <55785B9F020000780008316C@mail.emea.novell.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail6.bemta3.messagelabs.com ([195.245.230.39]) by lists.xen.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1Z2gst-0007Ae-AX for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Wed, 10 Jun 2015 14:21:39 +0000 In-Reply-To: <55785B9F020000780008316C@mail.emea.novell.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Jan Beulich Cc: Andrew Cooper , ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com, xen-devel List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On Wed, 2015-06-10 at 14:45 +0100, Jan Beulich wrote: > >>> On 10.06.15 at 14:56, wrote: > > On Wed, 2015-06-10 at 12:48 +0100, Jan Beulich wrote: > >> Sure we can; I just generally prefer not to bother people with > >> problems they already solved, but maybe that's the wrong approach > >> a case like this. > > > > Is the list of errata fixed by a given ucode update public? If not then > > I think we've done sufficient due diligence that we should feel ok to > > ask, even if the answer turns out to be fixed in microcode. > > So I went though the errata list for that specific model; the only > one really concerning seems to be CA135 ("A MOV to CR3 When > EPT is Enabled May Lead to an Unexpected Page Fault or an > Incorrect Page Translation"). But while it would affect us, it would > quite likely make the guest crash instead of idling or being hung. Yes, sounds like it. > So if we're going to approach Intel with this - will you or should I? I think it'd be best coming from you. Ian.