login
Header Space

 
 

Re: [PATCH RFC 2/2] paravirt: clean up lazy mode handling

Score:
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...>, Andi Kleen <ak@...>, Zachary Amsden <zach@...>, Rusty Russell <rusty@...>, Avi Kivity <avi@...>, Anthony Liguori <anthony@...>, Nakajima, Jun <jun.nakajima@...>
Date: Monday, October 15, 2007 - 9:54 pm

On 10/12/07, Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org> wrote:
Wouldn't it be better to WARN_ON, and simply not entering lazy mode?
It does not sound like a fatal condition.


Although this one seems like a fatal condition ;-)


I am concerned that this is 32-bit specific.
But hey: We could wrap it here, but the best solution may be just to
define this macro for 64-bit, and make it everyone benefits. So yeah,
this is a concern here, but I don't think anything should be changed
in this patch to address it so... so... ok ;-)

-- 
Glauber de Oliveira Costa.
"Free as in Freedom"
http://glommer.net

"The less confident you are, the more serious you have to act."
-
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
[PATCH RFC 2/2] paravirt: clean up lazy mode handling, Jeremy Fitzhardinge, (Fri Oct 12, 4:40 pm)
Re: [PATCH RFC 2/2] paravirt: clean up lazy mode handling, Glauber de Oliveira Costa..., (Mon Oct 15, 9:54 pm)
Re: [PATCH RFC 2/2] paravirt: clean up lazy mode handling, Rusty Russell, (Mon Oct 15, 8:04 pm)
speck-geostationary