Hi Steven, Markus,
On 9/10/07, Steven Rostedt <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> --
> On Mon, 10 Sep 2007, Markus Armbruster wrote:
> >
> > I believe this possible, but unlikely (perhaps not so unlikely on
> > virtual machines). Scenarios involve enable succeeding the first
> > time, failing the second time, and succeeding the third time. I can
> > provide details, but the point I'd like to make is not that this is
> > broken (although it is, strictly speaking), but that it is not
> > obviously correct where it easily could be: just clear the interrupt
> > enable bits when writing them to the hardware failed, like the old
> > code did.
> >
>
> I also want to stress that this is more of a clean up for "technically
> correct" code than a bug fix. This bug probably would never happen on
> baremetal unless it was running on broken hardware.
>
> BUT!!!
>
> With more and more systems going to a virtual environment, having a bug or
> some other anomaly can trigger the error that this patch prevents. The
> patch will also trigger a print in the case of running on a buggy virtual
> machine, which would help out the developers of that virtual machine to
> fix their code.
>
The patch is in my tree and will be merged in the next window.
--
Dmitry
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
