Stefano Stabellini writes:
> On Tue, 26 Jul 2016, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
>> David Vrabel writes:
>>
>> > On 26/07/16 13:30, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
>> >> It may happen that Xen's and Linux's ideas of vCPU id diverge. In
>> >> particular, when we crash on a secondary vCPU we may want to do kdum
On Tue, 26 Jul 2016, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
> David Vrabel writes:
>
> > On 26/07/16 13:30, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
> >> It may happen that Xen's and Linux's ideas of vCPU id diverge. In
> >> particular, when we crash on a secondary vCPU we may want to do kdump
> >> and unlike plain kexec where
David Vrabel writes:
> On 26/07/16 13:30, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
>> It may happen that Xen's and Linux's ideas of vCPU id diverge. In
>> particular, when we crash on a secondary vCPU we may want to do kdump
>> and unlike plain kexec where we do migrate_to_reboot_cpu() we try booting
>> on the vC
On 26/07/16 13:30, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
> It may happen that Xen's and Linux's ideas of vCPU id diverge. In
> particular, when we crash on a secondary vCPU we may want to do kdump
> and unlike plain kexec where we do migrate_to_reboot_cpu() we try booting
> on the vCPU which crashed. This doesn'
It may happen that Xen's and Linux's ideas of vCPU id diverge. In
particular, when we crash on a secondary vCPU we may want to do kdump
and unlike plain kexec where we do migrate_to_reboot_cpu() we try booting
on the vCPU which crashed. This doesn't work very well for PVHVM guests as
we have a numb
