On 26.06.2012, at 17:33, Cornelia Huck wrote: > On Tue, 26 Jun 2012 16:52:56 +0200 > Alexander Graf <agraf@xxxxxxx> wrote: > >> >> On 26.06.2012, at 16:06, Cornelia Huck wrote: >> >>> From: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@xxxxxxxxxx> >>> >>> Only if the sensed cpu is not running a status is stored, which >>> is reflected by condition code 1. If the cpu is running, condition >>> code 0 should be returned. >>> Just the opposite of what the code is doing. >>> >>> Acked-by: Cornelia Huck <cornelia.huck@xxxxxxxxxx> >>> Signed-off-by: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@xxxxxxxxxx> >>> Signed-off-by: Cornelia Huck <cornelia.huck@xxxxxxxxxx> >> >> Yikes. Is this a stable candidate? > > This code will only hit when running on a host running virtualized > itself (where sigp sense running will cause an intercept), so I doubt > many people will see the effects. You mean this will hit when running kvm inside of a z/VM VM? That's a pretty valid use case. Alex -- 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
