From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mukesh Rathor Subject: Re: [V9 PATCH 7/8] pvh dom0: check for vioapic null ptr in vioapic_range Date: Wed, 7 May 2014 16:52:04 -0700 Message-ID: <20140507165204.65789d2a@mantra.us.oracle.com> References: <1397607172-32065-1-git-send-email-mukesh.rathor@oracle.com> <1397607172-32065-8-git-send-email-mukesh.rathor@oracle.com> <534EC6850200007800009B08@nat28.tlf.novell.com> <20140416184448.25c62fb1@mantra.us.oracle.com> <534F96DF0200007800009D57@nat28.tlf.novell.com> <20140421175932.3f93d0ee@mantra.us.oracle.com> <53563769020000780000A8FD@nat28.tlf.novell.com> <20140422171159.61230575@mantra.us.oracle.com> <53579EED020000780000B36E@nat28.tlf.novell.com> <20140423141842.04d0879f@mantra.us.oracle.com> <5358D028020000780000BCE2@nat28.tlf.novell.com> <20140505171909.141ab75b@mantra.us.oracle.com> <5368AEF9020000780000F2D7@mail.emea.novell.com> <20140506180701.0ef99936@mantra.us.oracle.com> <5369F323020000780000FABF@mail.emea.novell.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail6.bemta14.messagelabs.com ([193.109.254.103]) by lists.xen.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1WiBdI-0002kI-Uw for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Wed, 07 May 2014 23:52:17 +0000 In-Reply-To: <5369F323020000780000FABF@mail.emea.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: George.Dunlap@eu.citrix.com, tim@xen.org, eddie.dong@intel.com, keir.xen@gmail.com, jun.nakajima@intel.com, xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On Wed, 07 May 2014 07:47:31 +0100 "Jan Beulich" wrote: > >>> On 07.05.14 at 03:07, wrote: > > On Tue, 06 May 2014 08:44:25 +0100 > > "Jan Beulich" 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