On 03/12/15 12:47, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 03.12.15 at 12:41, wrote:
>> On 03/12/15 11:41, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 03.12.15 at 12:02, wrote:
--- a/xen/arch/arm/vgic-v2.c
+++ b/xen/arch/arm/vgic-v2.c
@@ -315,11 +315,10 @@ static int vgic_v2_distr_mmio_write(struct vcpu *v,
>>> On 03.12.15 at 12:41, wrote:
> On 03/12/15 11:41, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 03.12.15 at 12:02, wrote:
>>> --- a/xen/arch/arm/vgic-v2.c
>>> +++ b/xen/arch/arm/vgic-v2.c
>>> @@ -315,11 +315,10 @@ static int vgic_v2_distr_mmio_write(struct vcpu *v,
> mmio_info_t *info)
>>> return 0;
On 03/12/15 11:41, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 03.12.15 at 12:02, wrote:
>> --- a/xen/arch/arm/vgic-v2.c
>> +++ b/xen/arch/arm/vgic-v2.c
>> @@ -315,11 +315,10 @@ static int vgic_v2_distr_mmio_write(struct vcpu *v,
>> mmio_info_t *info)
>> return 0;
>>
>> case GICD_ICACTIVER ... GIC
>>> On 03.12.15 at 12:02, wrote:
> --- a/xen/arch/arm/vgic-v2.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/arm/vgic-v2.c
> @@ -315,11 +315,10 @@ static int vgic_v2_distr_mmio_write(struct vcpu *v,
> mmio_info_t *info)
> return 0;
>
> case GICD_ICACTIVER ... GICD_ICACTIVERN:
> -if ( dabt.size != DAB
Hi Stefano,
On 03/12/15 11:02, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> Injecting a fault to the guest just because it is writing to one of the
> GICD_ICACTIVER registers, which are part of the GICv2 and GICv3 specs,
> is harsh. Additionally it causes recent linux kernels to fail to boot on
> Xen.
>
> Ignore
