On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 9:59 AM, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On 17/04/2015 22:18, Marcelo Tosatti wrote: >> The bug which this is fixing is very rare, have no memory of a report. >> >> In fact, its even difficult to create a synthetic reproducer. > > But then why was the task migration notifier even in Jeremy's original > code for Xen? Was it supposed to work even on non-synchronized TSC? > > If that's the case, then it could be reverted indeed; but then why did > you commit this patch to 4.1? Did you think of something that would > cause the seqcount-like protocol to fail, and that turned out not to be > the case later? I was only following the mailing list sparsely in March. I don't think anyone ever tried that hard to test this stuff. There was an infinte loop that Firefox was triggering as a KVM guest somewhat reliably until a couple months ago in the same vdso code. :( --Andy -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
