Re: [RFC 08/17] x86/asm/64: De-Xen-ify our NMI code

2017-09-07 Thread Juergen Gross
On 07/09/17 20:38, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 2:34 AM, Juergen Gross wrote: >> On 06/09/17 23:36, Andy Lutomirski wrote: >>> Xen PV is fundamentally incompatible with our fancy NMI code: it >>> doesn't use IST at all, and Xen entries clobber two stack slots >>> below the hardw

Re: [RFC 08/17] x86/asm/64: De-Xen-ify our NMI code

2017-09-07 Thread Andy Lutomirski
On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 2:34 AM, Juergen Gross wrote: > On 06/09/17 23:36, Andy Lutomirski wrote: >> Xen PV is fundamentally incompatible with our fancy NMI code: it >> doesn't use IST at all, and Xen entries clobber two stack slots >> below the hardware frame. >> >> Drop Xen PV support from our NM

Re: [RFC 08/17] x86/asm/64: De-Xen-ify our NMI code

2017-09-07 Thread Juergen Gross
On 06/09/17 23:36, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > Xen PV is fundamentally incompatible with our fancy NMI code: it > doesn't use IST at all, and Xen entries clobber two stack slots > below the hardware frame. > > Drop Xen PV support from our NMI code entirely. > > XXX: Juergen: could you write and test

[RFC 08/17] x86/asm/64: De-Xen-ify our NMI code

2017-09-06 Thread Andy Lutomirski
Xen PV is fundamentally incompatible with our fancy NMI code: it doesn't use IST at all, and Xen entries clobber two stack slots below the hardware frame. Drop Xen PV support from our NMI code entirely. XXX: Juergen: could you write and test the tiny patch needed to make Xen PV have a xen_nmi ent