From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Keir Fraser Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86-64: refine the XSA-9 fix Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2012 16:48:22 +0100 Message-ID: References: <20120817151136.GA25138@aepfle.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20120817151136.GA25138@aepfle.de> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Olaf Hering , Keir Fraser Cc: Jan Beulich , xen-devel List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 17/08/2012 16:11, "Olaf Hering" wrote: > On Mon, Jun 18, Keir Fraser wrote: > >> On 13/06/2012 11:04, "Jan Beulich" wrote: >> >>> Our product management wasn't happy with the "solution" for XSA-9, and >>> demanded that customer systems must continue to boot. Rather than >>> having our and perhaps other distros carry non-trivial patches, allow >>> for more fine grained control (panic on boot, deny guest creation, or >>> merely warn) by means of a single line change. >> >> All this seems to allow is to boot but not create domU-s. Which seems a bit >> pointless. > > Refusing to boot into dom0 with no good reason is a good way to lose > remote control of a system without serial console. Not funny. > > Fortunately I booted and tested with sles11 Xen first before ruining the > box with plain xen-unstable. > > So, please apply this patch and remove the panic() from > ./xen/arch/x86/cpu/amd.c Okay, that's a good argument for that patch. -- Keir > Olaf