Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen: Remove domain_crash_synchronous() completely

[Paul Durrant <Paul.Durrant@xxxxxxxxxx>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Xen-devel [mailto:xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
> Of Roger Pau Monné
> Sent: 01 August 2018 14:50
> To: Andrew Cooper <Andrew.Cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Julien Grall <julien.grall@xxxxxxx>; Stefano Stabellini
> <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx>; Wei Liu <wei.liu2@xxxxxxxxxx>; Jan Beulich
> <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>; Xen-devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen: Remove
> domain_crash_synchronous() completely
> 
> On Wed, Aug 01, 2018 at 02:29:35PM +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> > domain_crash_synchronous() is unsafe to use in general as it may leave
> > spinlocks held, temporary memory allocated, etc.
> >
> > With domain_crash_synchronous() removed from the ARM code in 4.11,
> take the
> > opportunity to remove the infrastructure completely by opencoding the
> softirq
> > loop in the remaining callsites, all of which are destined for deletion.
> >
> > None of these sites are at risk of having a pending ioreq to qemu, which
> means
> > that the vcpu_end_shutdown_deferral() isn't necessary.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> Reviewed-by: Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> This however removes the printk with the file an line number from
> where the domain_crash was called. I don't think it's a big issue
> because each call site already has a message.

There are many places which call domain_crash() without any other logging so 
such crashes will certainly get harder to diagnose.

  Paul

> 
> Roger.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-devel mailing list
> Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel