Re: [V9 PATCH 7/8] pvh dom0: check for vioapic null ptr in vioapic_range

[Mukesh Rathor <mukesh.rathor@oracle.com>]

On Wed, 07 May 2014 07:47:31 +0100
"Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@suse.com> wrote:

> >>> On 07.05.14 at 03:07, <mukesh.rathor@oracle.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, 06 May 2014 08:44:25 +0100
> > "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@suse.com> wrote:
> >> So my first preference would be #VE to be delivered to the guest.
> >> If such can't be delivered, I guess killing the guest is more
> >> natural than injecting #GP - we may want/need to make support for
> >> #VE a requirement for PVH guests.
> > 
> > #VE support doesn't appear to be there in guest right now. So, let
> > me not get too distracted, we've other higher prirority fixmes, not
> > to mention other supports like amd, migration, 32bit etc I'd like
> > to address right after this series goes in.
> 
> Seems like we're once again having some disagreement in terms of
> how to approach problems: If a proper solution requires more
> extensive work, then to me this not a reason to discard it without
> any further evaluation. You, otoh, seem to prefer adding more
> workarounds and fixmes. If you were to tell me that the solution
> isn't suitable for technical reasons, that would be a different thing.

What I am trying to tell is that I don't see #VE support in linux right
now. Upstreaming that in my experience could be anywhere from 2 months
to year depending on maintainers! Meanwhile, xen will crash if a pvh 
guest causes ept violation.

thanks
mukesh