From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752374AbbCEWJD (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Mar 2015 17:09:03 -0500 Received: from terminus.zytor.com ([198.137.202.10]:53910 "EHLO mail.zytor.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751327AbbCEWJA (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Mar 2015 17:09:00 -0500 Message-ID: <54F8D3D8.3060406@zytor.com> Date: Thu, 05 Mar 2015 14:08:24 -0800 From: "H. Peter Anvin" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk CC: David Vrabel , Sarah Newman , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, xen-devel@lists.xen.org, Ingo Molnar , Suresh Siddha , Thomas Gleixner Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCHv1] x86: don't schedule when handling #NM exception References: <1394468273-13676-1-git-send-email-david.vrabel@citrix.com> <531DEB11.2070709@zytor.com> <531DF319.6010800@citrix.com> <53266841.6090308@prgmr.com> <1ebfa80c-4a68-4602-bc98-e5d5f0893998@email.android.com> <53266D94.70902@prgmr.com> <53266F56.9030909@zytor.com> <5326F89F.8010404@citrix.com> <20140319132156.GA12574@phenom.dumpdata.com> <5329B17E.8060303@zytor.com> <20140623130818.GA6772@laptop.dumpdata.com> In-Reply-To: <20140623130818.GA6772@laptop.dumpdata.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 06/23/2014 06:08 AM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 08:02:22AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: >> On 03/19/2014 06:21 AM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: >>>> >>>> The following patch does the always eager allocation. It's a fixup of >>>> Suresh's original patch. >>>> >>> >>> Hey Peter, >>> >>> I think this is the solution you were looking for? >>> >>> Or are there some other subtle issues that you think lurk around? >>> >> >> Ah, I managed to miss it (mostly because it was buried *inside* another >> email and didn't change the subject line... I really dislike that mode >> of delivering a patch. > > Let me roll up some of these patchset and send them as git send-email. > >> >> Let me see if the issues have been fixed. Still wondering if there is a >> way we can get away without the boot_func hack... > > I have to confesss I don't even remember what the 'if the issues have been > fixed' is referring to? > Hi Konrad... it looks like this got left waiting for you and got forgotten? -hpa