Am Sun, 8 Feb 2009 04:26:16 -0200
schrieb Marcelo Tosatti :
> Its confusing that there is the exact same check below, with kvm->lock
> held, and that both are needed since assignment happens under the lock.
>
> Can you also make it straightforward while fixing the bug please.
>
> Probably just ho
Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
On Thu, Feb 05, 2009 at 05:05:01PM +0100, Carsten Otte wrote:
KVM common code should'nt try to create the same virtual cpu twice.
In case of s390, it crashes badly in kvm_arch_vcpu_create.
Reported-by: Mijo Safradin
Signed-off-by: Carsten Otte
---
virt/kvm/kvm_main.
On Thu, Feb 05, 2009 at 05:05:01PM +0100, Carsten Otte wrote:
> KVM common code should'nt try to create the same virtual cpu twice.
> In case of s390, it crashes badly in kvm_arch_vcpu_create.
>
> Reported-by: Mijo Safradin
> Signed-off-by: Carsten Otte
> ---
> virt/kvm/kvm_main.c |3 +++
>
Am Thu, 5 Feb 2009 17:05:01 +0100
schrieb Carsten Otte :
> KVM common code should'nt try to create the same virtual cpu twice.
> In case of s390, it crashes badly in kvm_arch_vcpu_create.
This patch is broken, will refresh it. Please do _NOT_ apply (!)
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the lin
KVM common code should'nt try to create the same virtual cpu twice.
In case of s390, it crashes badly in kvm_arch_vcpu_create.
Reported-by: Mijo Safradin
Signed-off-by: Carsten Otte
---
virt/kvm/kvm_main.c |3 +++
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
Index: kvm/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
=
