From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrew Cooper Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: make compat_iret() domain crash cases distinguishable Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2015 11:07:49 +0000 Message-ID: <56374405.9060900@citrix.com> References: <5633BB0802000078000B0613@prv-mh.provo.novell.com> <5633BF82.2000301@citrix.com> <56374F5402000078000B0AA8@prv-mh.provo.novell.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail6.bemta5.messagelabs.com ([195.245.231.135]) by lists.xen.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1ZtCxu-00012M-Nz for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Mon, 02 Nov 2015 11:07:54 +0000 In-Reply-To: <56374F5402000078000B0AA8@prv-mh.provo.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 Cc: xen-devel , Keir Fraser List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 02/11/15 10:56, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>> On 30.10.15 at 20:05, wrote: >> On 30/10/15 17:46, Jan Beulich wrote: >>> Rather than issuing a (mostly) useless separate message, rely on >>> domain_crash() providing enough data, and leverage the line number >>> information it prints. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich >> The messages are not completely useless, and they do save a round-trip >> to the debug symbols (which can be a very long RTT when dealing with >> customers). >> >> I agree that moving the domain_crash()'s is a good idea, but can we get >> away with just demoing the gprintk()s to gdprintk()s ? > How would that aid with the customer case (who wouldn't normally run > debug hypervisors)? I suppose it wouldn't in the general case. XenServer now ships both regular and debug hypervisors to short circuit the first RTT when dealing with host crashes. A side effect is that guest crashes can be diagnosed more easily by switching to the debug hypervisor. ~Andrew