From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <51320ACA.4070101@xenomai.org> Date: Sat, 02 Mar 2013 15:20:58 +0100 From: Gilles Chanteperdrix MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1362151982.5735.YahooMailNeo@web171205.mail.ir2.yahoo.com> <5130E0C7.80709@siemens.com> <5130E6FE.2070905@siemens.com> <1362185238.64750.YahooMailNeo@web171203.mail.ir2.yahoo.com> <5131B5A2.6000501@web.de> <5131DC27.80909@xenomai.org> <5131DE8D.4070701@web.de> In-Reply-To: <5131DE8D.4070701@web.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Xenomai] kvm freeze with ipipe patch for kernel 3.x List-Id: Discussions about the Xenomai project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Jan Kiszka Cc: "xenomai@xenomai.org" On 03/02/2013 12:12 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote: > On 2013-03-02 12:01, Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote: >> On 03/02/2013 09:17 AM, Jan Kiszka wrote: >> >>> On 2013-03-02 01:47, Gabriele Moabiti wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> ----- Messaggio originale ----- >>>> >>>> Da: Jan Kiszka >>>> On 2013-03-01 18:09, Jan Kiszka wrote: >>>>> There is more broken, even in latest stable 3.5.7. See the patches at >>>>> [1] for a tested version. Unfortunately, I cannot update my tree for 3.8 >>>>> ATM as git services seem to be down on xenomai.org. >>>> >>>> Does this and other important patches will be backported to 3.2? >>> >>> I'm planning to get them merged into 3.8 first of all, maybe also into >>> 3.5 (as this is our current production baseline). No plans exist beyond >>> that. I'd rather like to leave older kernels alone to reduce maintenance >>> efforts (porting is simple, proper testing takes time). >>> >>> Also note that 3.2 is lacking much more critical fixes than those few >>> around KVM. IOW: Don't use it for anything serious with x86. >> >> >> Maybe reverting the mprotect/ipipe_pin_vma patches in the 3.2 branch, so >> as to avoid the zero page corruption, but take some faults sometimes >> would be a simple, feasible solution? 3.2 seems to have been chosen as a >> long term stable branch. > > Again, the problem is not writing the patches It is easy to forget a patch when (back)porting patches from an I-pipe to the other. > but testing all the stuff > in all necessary combinations. I can test 4 combinations at once: i686 UP, i686 SMP and x86_64 (UP or SMP), this leaves only one combination to test. > BTW, 3.4 is also LTS, and there we have those fixes at least (just not > yet pulled into the mainline). Are you sure you have not missed any patches for 3.4? -- Gilles.