Liu, Jinsong wrote:
> Liu, Jinsong wrote:
>> Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>>> On 30.09.11 at 11:42, "Liu, Jinsong" <jinsong.liu@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>> Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 30.09.11 at 10:21, "Liu, Jinsong" <jinsong.liu@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> Executing guest code will not satisfy the check
>>>>>> if ( !(gstatus & MCG_STATUS_RIPV) && !guest_mode(regs)) return
>>>>>> -1; so it would not panic system.
>>>>>
>>>>> Exactly. But it should when the prefetch was to hypervisor code.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Wouldn't processor refresh instruction prefetch queue under such
>>>> case?
>>>
>>> That's a question that you are better positioned to answer than me.
>>> But the SRAR errors being a sub-category of uncorrected errors I
>>> would think it can't be that simple.
>>>
>>
>> Hmm, I will check this question internally first.
>> BTW, we would have 7 days holiday (1/10 ~ 7/10), so email reply
>> maybe some slow.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Jinsong
>
> Ah, just think our talking context: the prefetched instruction would
> have been flushed since we now at mce exception context. So I think
> no need to overkill here, just let guest handle it --> who own, who
> take.
>
> Thanks,
> Jinsong
Jan,
Do you think following is OK?
if ( !(gstatus & MCG_STATUS_RIPV) && !guest_mode(regs))
return -1;
Thanks,
Jinsong
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
Home