From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: [patch 13/26] Xen-paravirt_ops: Consistently wrap paravirt ops callsites to make them patchable Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2007 09:06:15 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: References: <20070316.023331.59468179.davem@davemloft.net> <45FB005D.9060809@goop.org> <1174127638.8897.75.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20070318.003309.71088169.davem@davemloft.net> <20070318120814.GA45869@muc.de> <1174272469.11680.23.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1174348905.11680.54.camel@localhost.localdomain> <45FF4043.4000805@vmware.com> <45FF770C.7050301@goop.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com, virtualization@lists.osdl.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, David Miller , chrisw@sous-sol.org, Andi Kleen , anthony@codemonkey.ws, akpm@linux-foundation.org, mingo@elte.hu To: "Eric W. Biederman" Return-path: In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: virtualization-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org Errors-To: virtualization-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Tue, 20 Mar 2007, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > = > If that is the case. In the normal kernel what would > the "the oops, we got an interrupt code do?" > I assume it would leave interrupts disabled when it returns? > Like we currently do with the delayed disable of normal interrupts? Yeah, disable interrupts, and set a flag that the fake "sti" can test, and = just return without doing anything. (You may or may not also need to do extra work to Ack the hardware = interrupt etc, which may be irq-controller specific. Once the CPU has = accepted the interrupt, you may not be able to just leave it dangling) But I was throwing that out as a long-term thing. I'm not claiming it's = trivial, but it should be doable. Linus