Hi Anthony --
I am curious about the use of B1NATS in the code
around this patch. Under what circumstances does
this get set/used? There is similar unat code in
fast_tick (default off) and fast_reflect (default on)
and I am wondering if similar unat changes are needed
and whether it is now OK to turn on HANDLE_AR_UNAT
(which is now default off).
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Xu, Anthony [mailto:anthony.xu@xxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2005 1:08 AM
> To: Magenheimer, Dan (HP Labs Fort Collins)
> Cc: xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: ar.unat[patch] fixed this ar.uant issue.
> Last time, I used ar.unat register to restore guest general
> register nat bit in hyper_rfi function for eliminating nat
> bit consumption fault,but not restored ar.unat.
> Signed-off-by Anthony Xu <Anthony.xu@xxxxxxxxx>
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Magenheimer, Dan (HP Labs Fort Collins)
> >Sent: 2005年11月3日 11:54
> >To: Xu, Anthony
> >Cc: xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >Subject: RE: ar.unat
> >> I can take a look at this, please send me regcheck utilty.
> >> Thanks
> >> Anthony
> >Great, thanks! Here's where I got Tony's regcheck tool. If
> >it's not still there, perhaps Tony can post it.
> >By the way, if anyone tries this on a domU, Matt Chapman
> >has a pending fix that resolves a FP save/restore issue.
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: linux-ia64-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >> [mailto:linux-ia64-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Luck, Tony
> >> Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 4:33 PM
> >> To: linux-ia64@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >> Subject: RE: [patch 2.6.11-rc3-bk4] Correctly dereference
> >> ia64_mca_data
> >> Back on February 9th, I wrote:
> >> >I wrote a test program that loads up random values into registers
> >> >(just r1-r31, a bunch of stacked registers, and f2-f127 for now)
> >> >and then checks that all the registers haven't changed value a
> >> >few thousand times, before reloading with a new set of random
> >> >values.
> >> A few people asked whether I could post the program ... it took
> >> a while to get sign-off ... but that gave me time to add "branch",
> >> "predicate" and half a dozen "application" registers to the mix,
> >> plus make it print the name of the register that was nuked (instead
> >> of a number that required manual translation).
> >> I've tested it by using a debugger to zap one of each class
> >> of register
> >> that is being monitored to check that it works.
> >> http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/aegl/ia64regcheck.tgz
> >> Usage ... compile, and run a few copies. If they all
> "exit(0)" (which
> >> may take a couple of days) the test passed. Otherwise you
> should see
> >> the name of the register printed to stderr, and exit code 1.
> >> Apart from the MCA case, I haven't seen it report a problem
> >> yet ... but
> >> I've only run a few hours.
> >> -Tony
Xen-ia64-devel mailing list