From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Avi Kivity Subject: Re: [PATCH -v2] QEMU-KVM: MCE: Relay UCR MCE to guest Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2009 08:10:56 +0300 Message-ID: <4AADD060.8060100@redhat.com> References: <1252463282.5212.44.camel@yhuang-dev.sh.intel.com> <4AA79A31.9070600@redhat.com> <1252550406.5212.133.camel@yhuang-dev.sh.intel.com> <20090910093539.GB19428@basil.fritz.box> <1252896913.15717.137.camel@yhuang-dev.sh.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Andi Kleen , Anthony Liguori , "kvm@vger.kernel.org" To: Huang Ying Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:4582 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750696AbZINFLC (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Sep 2009 01:11:02 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1252896913.15717.137.camel@yhuang-dev.sh.intel.com> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 09/14/2009 05:55 AM, Huang Ying wrote: > Hi, Avi, > > On Thu, 2009-09-10 at 17:35 +0800, Andi Kleen wrote: > >>>> (also, I if we can't handle guest-mode SIGBUS I think it would be nice >>>> to raise it again so the process terminates due to the SIGBUS). >>>> >>> For SIGBUS we can not relay to guest as MCE, we can either abort or >>> reset SIGBUS to SIGDFL and re-raise it. Both are OK for me. You prefer >>> the latter one? >>> >> I think a suitable error message and exit would be better than a plain >> signal kill. It shouldn't look like qemu crashed due to a software >> bug. Ideally a error message in a way that it can be parsed by libvirt etc. >> and reported in a suitable way. >> > Do you agree with us about SIGBUS processing? > Yes. -- I have a truly marvellous patch that fixes the bug which this signature is too narrow to contain.