On 16/10/17 17:21, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>> On 16.10.17 at 18:07, <andrew.coop...@citrix.com> wrote: >> On 16/10/17 16:41, Jan Beulich wrote: >>> >>> On 16.10.17 at 16:38, <andrew.coop...@citrix.com> wrote: >>>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/dom0_build.c >>>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/dom0_build.c >>>> @@ -614,6 +614,7 @@ static int __init pvh_setup_cpus(struct domain *d, >>>> paddr_t entry, >>>> >>>> update_domain_wallclock_time(d); >>>> >>>> + v->is_initialised = 1; >>>> clear_bit(_VPF_down, &v->pause_flags); >>> How come this has no counterpart of code being deleted? >> Because the bug is that it was never being set before. > Oh, I see - I had read that part of the commit message in slightly > a wrong way. > > Reviewed-by: Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com>
How about this for an adjusted commit message? * x86 PVH previously was not setting v->is_initialised for d0v0, despite setting the vcpu running eventually. Therefore, a later VCPUOP_initialise hypercall will modify state under the feet of the running vcpu. This is latent as PVH dom0 construction don't yet function. _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
