From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Luke S. Crawford" Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/fpu: CR0.TS should be set before trap into PV guest's #NM exception handle Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2013 02:25:48 -0800 Message-ID: <529C602C.1050501@prgmr.com> References: <52967C45.3030506@prgmr.com> <529681B9.4010503@prgmr.com> <52986F90020000780010814A@nat28.tlf.novell.com> <52992E4A.3050109@prgmr.com> <529C54170200007800108879@nat28.tlf.novell.com> <529C59B8.6060201@prgmr.com> <529C693302000078001089A7@nat28.tlf.novell.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail6.bemta4.messagelabs.com ([85.158.143.247]) by lists.xen.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1VnQhK-0003Fk-Tt for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Mon, 02 Dec 2013 10:25:52 +0000 In-Reply-To: <529C693302000078001089A7@nat28.tlf.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 , Sarah Newman Cc: xen-devel List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 12/02/2013 02:04 AM, Jan Beulich wrote: >> I don't have access to my guest's config files. Something I can do as >> the manager of the dom0 to ameliorate the problem without requiting the >> customers to do anything, and without requiring me to break into the >> guest and figure out how to patch whatever random kernel they might be >> using would help me a lot. > > If you're the manager of the Dom0, how can you not have access > to your guests' config files? I misspoke. I mean that I don't have access to the guest's kernel, and the guest's linux config files, without breaking into the guests. Of course, I have access to the config files that boot the guests. > And it surely isn't the responsibility of the Dom0 admin to take care > of broken guest kernels. That's solely the guest admin's job. That's what I keep saying, but that's not the way the customers see it. In fact, I think this is why most providers keep a tight hold over what kernels they allow their customers to run. Like I said, it's just my $0.02, and as I recall, I haven't even given you that much, so my business needs, obviously, aren't always going to map to your priorities. I'm just saying that from the point of view of a provider, a solution that can be implemented from the dom0 is almost always better than a solution that requires a change within the DomU.