> From: Jan Beulich
> Sent: Monday, March 14, 2022 3:43 PM
>
> On 14.03.2022 07:35, Tian, Kevin wrote:
> >> From: Jan Beulich
> >> Sent: Monday, February 28, 2022 3:36 PM
> >>
> >> On 25.02.2022 18:11, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> >>> On 25/02/2022 13:19, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 25.02.2022 13:28,
On 14.03.2022 07:35, Tian, Kevin wrote:
>> From: Jan Beulich
>> Sent: Monday, February 28, 2022 3:36 PM
>>
>> On 25.02.2022 18:11, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>>> On 25/02/2022 13:19, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 25.02.2022 13:28, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 25/02/2022 08:44, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On
> From: Jan Beulich
> Sent: Monday, February 28, 2022 3:36 PM
>
> On 25.02.2022 18:11, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> > On 25/02/2022 13:19, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >> On 25.02.2022 13:28, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> >>> On 25/02/2022 08:44, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 24.02.2022 20:48, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> >
On 25.02.2022 18:11, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 25/02/2022 13:19, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 25.02.2022 13:28, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>>> On 25/02/2022 08:44, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 24.02.2022 20:48, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> In VMX operation, the handling of INIT IPIs is changed. EXIT_REASON_INIT
On 25/02/2022 13:19, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 25.02.2022 13:28, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>> On 25/02/2022 08:44, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>> On 24.02.2022 20:48, Andrew Cooper wrote:
In VMX operation, the handling of INIT IPIs is changed. EXIT_REASON_INIT
has
nothing to do with the guest in
On 25.02.2022 14:51, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 25, 2022 at 02:19:39PM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 25.02.2022 13:28, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>>> On 25/02/2022 08:44, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 24.02.2022 20:48, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> In VMX operation, the handling of INIT
On Fri, Feb 25, 2022 at 02:19:39PM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 25.02.2022 13:28, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> > On 25/02/2022 08:44, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >> On 24.02.2022 20:48, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> >>> In VMX operation, the handling of INIT IPIs is changed. EXIT_REASON_INIT
> >>> has
> >>> nothin
On 25.02.2022 13:28, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 25/02/2022 08:44, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 24.02.2022 20:48, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>>> In VMX operation, the handling of INIT IPIs is changed. EXIT_REASON_INIT
>>> has
>>> nothing to do with the guest in question, simply signals that an INIT was
>>> r
On 25/02/2022 08:44, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 24.02.2022 20:48, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>> In VMX operation, the handling of INIT IPIs is changed. EXIT_REASON_INIT has
>> nothing to do with the guest in question, simply signals that an INIT was
>> received.
>>
>> Ignoring the INIT is probably the wron
On 24.02.2022 20:48, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> In VMX operation, the handling of INIT IPIs is changed. EXIT_REASON_INIT has
> nothing to do with the guest in question, simply signals that an INIT was
> received.
>
> Ignoring the INIT is probably the wrong thing to do, but is helpful for
> debugging.
In VMX operation, the handling of INIT IPIs is changed. EXIT_REASON_INIT has
nothing to do with the guest in question, simply signals that an INIT was
received.
Ignoring the INIT is probably the wrong thing to do, but is helpful for
debugging. Crashing the domain which happens to be in context i
11 matches
Mail list logo