Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: > Zachary Amsden wrote: > >> Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote: >> >>> Hi Andi, >>> >>> What problem do they cause together? There's certainly no problem with >>> Xen+vdso (in fact, its actually very useful so that it picks up the >>> right libc with Xen-friendly TLS). >>> >>> >> Methinks the compat VDSO support got broken in the config? Paravirt + >> COMPAT_VDSO are incompatible. >> > > Yes, that's true, but I'm looking at arch/i386/kernel/sysenter.c: > > #ifdef CONFIG_PARAVIRT > unsigned int __read_mostly vdso_enabled = 0; > #else > unsigned int __read_mostly vdso_enabled = 1; > #endif > > I can't think of any reason why that should be necessary. > It's not for us or Xen. Perhaps it came from lhype?
