From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Gleb Natapov <gleb@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: 2.6.38-rc6: general protection error inside KVM 64 bits guest
Date: Fri, 27 May 2011 15:48:33 +0300
Message-ID: <20110527124833.GG22042@redhat.com>
References: <20110306143503.GD25565@redhat.com>
 <4D73A1EA.1060702@redhat.com>
 <4D73A368.9040702@redhat.com>
 <AANLkTim9OYzsfp8+ZOk9cqv7Kwj7pSZTx=uDdo4C7Jb3@mail.gmail.com>
 <20110309092520.GC10151@redhat.com>
 <AANLkTi=J8V-yhEpafZXKR5Z1y=nf+eGJ+iJMAzVZRC7W@mail.gmail.com>
 <20110309093222.GD10151@redhat.com>
 <4D77505E.3060509@redhat.com>
 <AANLkTik+eVUhiaJNSs7nimKCWWRREBq_2ixpQVmumjZ_@mail.gmail.com>
 <BANLkTikMmLvXvyinCLJnXghTZOmqqwgS3g@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r
Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE
Cc: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>, kvm@vger.kernel.org
To: Francis Moreau <francis.moro@gmail.com>
Return-path: <kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:11870 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1753996Ab1E0Msg convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT
	<rfc822;kvm@vger.kernel.org>); Fri, 27 May 2011 08:48:36 -0400
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTikMmLvXvyinCLJnXghTZOmqqwgS3g@mail.gmail.com>
Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <kvm.vger.kernel.org>

On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 12:22:52PM +0200, Francis Moreau wrote:
> Hi guys,
>=20
> Sorry for resurrecting this but I just checkout kernel v2.6.39 and
> this fix doesn't seem to be present in this release...
>=20
> Am I wrong ?
>=20
Hmm. Should be fixed by commit: 5601d05b8c340ee2643febc146099325eff187e=
b

> Thanks
>=20
> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 11:07 AM, Francis Moreau <francis.moro@gmail.c=
om> wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 11:03 AM, Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com> wrote:
> >> On 03/09/2011 11:32 AM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, Mar 09, 2011 at 10:30:56AM +0100, Francis Moreau wrote:
> >>> > =9AOn Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 10:25 AM, Gleb Natapov<gleb@redhat.co=
m> =9Awrote:
> >>> > =9A> =9AOn Wed, Mar 09, 2011 at 08:05:54AM +0100, Francis Morea=
u wrote:
> >>> > =9A>> =9AHi,
> >>> > =9A>>
> >>> > =9A>> =9AOn Sun, Mar 6, 2011 at 4:08 PM, Avi Kivity<avi@redhat.=
com> =9Awrote:
> >>> > =9A>> =9A> =9AOn 03/06/2011 05:02 PM, Avi Kivity wrote:
> >>> > =9A>> =9A>>
> >>> > =9A>> =9A>> =9A(for #TS we need additional logic... will this a=
rch never end?)
> >>> > =9A>> =9A>>
> >>> > =9A>> =9A>
> >>> > =9A>> =9A> =9AActually these instructions don't generate #TS.
> >>> > =9A>> =9A>
> >>> > =9A>>
> >>> > =9A>> =9AI just wanted to know if this issue is going to be fix=
ed before
> >>> > 2.6.38 is out ?
> >>> > =9A>>
> >>> > =9A> =9AI posted updated patches. It is up to maintainers to de=
cide if the
> >>> > =9A> =9Apatches should be included in 2.6.38 at such late rc st=
age.
> >>> > =9A>
> >>> >
> >>> > =9AWould have been nice to CC me since I reported the issue.
> >>> >
> >>> Yes, sorry about that. Avi please add Reported-by: to the patch t=
oo.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Will be happy to add an -and-tested-by: too if you get the chance.
> >>
> >
> > Sure you can add this since I already tested it and it fixed my tes=
t case.
> >
> > thanks
> > --
> > Francis
> >
>=20
>=20
>=20
> --=20
> Francis

--
			Gleb.