From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752383AbXJUMHw (ORCPT ); Sun, 21 Oct 2007 08:07:52 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751160AbXJUMHp (ORCPT ); Sun, 21 Oct 2007 08:07:45 -0400 Received: from il.qumranet.com ([82.166.9.18]:34337 "EHLO il.qumranet.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750912AbXJUMHp (ORCPT ); Sun, 21 Oct 2007 08:07:45 -0400 Message-ID: <471B40E4.4060204@qumranet.com> Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2007 14:07:00 +0200 From: Avi Kivity User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.0 (X11/20070419) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Laurent Vivier CC: kvm-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/11] KVM updates for Linux 2.6.24-rc review References: <1192964892617-git-send-email-avi@qumranet.com> <471B340C.5010800@qumranet.com> <471B3DD3.3080107@bull.net> In-Reply-To: <471B3DD3.3080107@bull.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Laurent Vivier wrote: > Avi Kivity a écrit : >> Avi Kivity wrote: >>> The following patches fix fallout from the main 2.6.24 KVM merge. An >>> exception is the movnti emulation patch, which adds support for Linux >>> 2.6.16 guests. >>> >>> The patches can be found in kvm.git in the branch kvm-updates-2.6.24. >>> There is also a branch kvm-updates-2.6.25 which will form the basis of >>> the next merge window submission. >>> >>> Please review the patches and let me know if something is wrong or if >>> a patch is missing. >>> >>> >> >> >> Laurent, I believe the following patch (in kvm-updates-2.6.25) needs >> to go into 2.6.24 as well. Can you comment on this? > > What kind of comment do you want ? Well, whether it needs to go into .24. > What are the requirements to go in 2.6.24 instead of 2.6.25 ? > > Is a bug correction enough ? :-P > It has to fix something real-life, in a real guest. > This patch correct a bad behavior of x86_emulate_insn() in case of > error with a REP prefix. > > This patch is needed because, without it, when REP prefix is used with > an instruction failing for some reasons (like IO or page fault) we > don't restore all modified registers (like RSI and RDI), but only ECX > and EIP, so when we re-enter in x86_emulate_insn() we modify again an > already modified value. Moreover, this patch manages correctly the > case where the instruction fails in writeback(). > Okay, I guess it is needed. Can you backport it to the branch? It's very different from kvm-updates-2.6.24... -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Avi Kivity Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/11] KVM updates for Linux 2.6.24-rc review Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2007 14:07:00 +0200 Message-ID: <471B40E4.4060204@qumranet.com> References: <1192964892617-git-send-email-avi@qumranet.com> <471B340C.5010800@qumranet.com> <471B3DD3.3080107@bull.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: kvm-devel-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org, linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Laurent Vivier Return-path: In-Reply-To: <471B3DD3.3080107-6ktuUTfB/bM@public.gmane.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: kvm-devel-bounces-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org Errors-To: kvm-devel-bounces-5NWGOfrQmneRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org Laurent Vivier wrote: > Avi Kivity a =E9crit : >> Avi Kivity wrote: >>> The following patches fix fallout from the main 2.6.24 KVM merge. An >>> exception is the movnti emulation patch, which adds support for Linux >>> 2.6.16 guests. >>> >>> The patches can be found in kvm.git in the branch kvm-updates-2.6.24. >>> There is also a branch kvm-updates-2.6.25 which will form the basis of >>> the next merge window submission. >>> >>> Please review the patches and let me know if something is wrong or if >>> a patch is missing. >>> >>> = >> >> >> Laurent, I believe the following patch (in kvm-updates-2.6.25) needs = >> to go into 2.6.24 as well. Can you comment on this? > > What kind of comment do you want ? Well, whether it needs to go into .24. > What are the requirements to go in 2.6.24 instead of 2.6.25 ? > > Is a bug correction enough ? :-P > It has to fix something real-life, in a real guest. > This patch correct a bad behavior of x86_emulate_insn() in case of = > error with a REP prefix. > > This patch is needed because, without it, when REP prefix is used with = > an instruction failing for some reasons (like IO or page fault) we = > don't restore all modified registers (like RSI and RDI), but only ECX = > and EIP, so when we re-enter in x86_emulate_insn() we modify again an = > already modified value. Moreover, this patch manages correctly the = > case where the instruction fails in writeback(). > Okay, I guess it is needed. Can you backport it to the branch? It's = very different from kvm-updates-2.6.24... -- = error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/