Am 19.11.2013 um 00:49 schrieb Scott Wood <scottwood@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > On Mon, 2013-11-18 at 16:09 -0500, Alexander Graf wrote: >> On 18.11.2013, at 03:34, “tiejun.chen” <tiejun.chen@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >>> On 10/23/2013 09:26 AM, Tiejun Chen wrote: >>>> We enter with interrupts disabled in hardware, but we need to >>>> call RECONCILE_IRQ_STATE anyway to ensure that the software state >>>> is kept in sync instead of calling hard_irq_disable() directly. >> >> Why didn't this happen before? What is this patch fixing? > > It's cleanup, not a fix. It makes things more consistent with other > 64-bit kernel entry code. Could we please note this in the comit message so that whoever stumbles over the patch later knows that this is effectively a no-op (and just prepones the lazy sync)? Also, I'm still wary of lazy breakage in the pr code path, but I guess since it's completely untested today already it's ok to ignore. 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
