> > But iirc that bad patch is a Linux side one (i.e. you're trying to fix > > something upstream that isn't upstream)? > > > Right, so the patch that this improves upon, and that Fedora and Ubuntu are > currently carrying is not upstream because: > > a) It's crap, it cripples upstream xen users, but doesn't impact RHEL xen > users because xsave was never supported there. > > b) The hypervisor was patched to make it unnecessary quite some time ago, > and we hoped EC2 would eventually pick up that correct patch and we could > drop the crap kernel patch. > > Unfortunately this has not happened. We are at a point where EC2 really is > a quirk that has to be worked around. Distros do not want to maintain > a separate EC2 build of the kernel, so the easiest way is to cripple > current upstream xen users. This quirk is unfortunately the best possible > solution. Having it upstream also makes it possible for any user to build > an upstream kernel that will run on EC2 without having to dig a random > patch out of a vendor kernel.
Sure. Jan is asking though for actual confirmation that the upstream kernel does indeed go belly up without a workaround. And whether this patch (which I would did since Canonical is carrying it) does fix the issue. I am still a newbie on the Amazon EC2 upload your kernel thing (hint, would appreciate somebody taking this patch and trying it out). -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
