From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Samuel Thibault Subject: Re: Windows Bug Check 0x101 issue Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 17:57:18 +0000 Message-ID: <20080325175718.GT4411@implementation.uk.xensource.com> References: <7k4pawfnxs.fsf@pingu.sky.yk.fujitsu.co.jp> <7k1w5zf50j.fsf@pingu.sky.yk.fujitsu.co.jp> <18408.57824.846687.465435@mariner.uk.xensource.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <18408.57824.846687.465435@mariner.uk.xensource.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Ian Jackson Cc: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com, Kouya Shimura List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org Ian Jackson, le Tue 25 Mar 2008 11:28:32 +0000, a écrit : > The other is that the IDE flush necessarily blocks. What do you mean by that? In a real machine, the processor doesn't block while the flush is being done, and the OS just expects to see an irq some time after. In that regard his patch should work fine. That said it can't be applied as is because of the other points you raised, of course. Samuel