Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S964983AbWEJPs3 (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 May 2006 11:48:29 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S964984AbWEJPs2 (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 May 2006 11:48:28 -0400 Received: from mta2.cl.cam.ac.uk ([128.232.0.14]:49848 "EHLO mta2.cl.cam.ac.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S964983AbWEJPs1 (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 May 2006 11:48:27 -0400 Date: Wed, 10 May 2006 16:48:23 +0100 From: Christian Limpach To: Alan Cox Cc: Chris Wright , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, virtualization@lists.osdl.org, xen-devel@lists.xensource.com, Ian Pratt Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [RFC PATCH 01/35] Add XEN config options and disable unsupported config options. Message-ID: <20060510154823.GZ7834@cl.cam.ac.uk> References: <20060509084945.373541000@sous-sol.org> <20060509085145.790527000@sous-sol.org> <1147275418.17886.61.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1147275418.17886.61.camel@localhost.localdomain> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1693 Lines: 45 On Wed, May 10, 2006 at 04:36:58PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote: > On Maw, 2006-05-09 at 00:00 -0700, Chris Wright wrote: > > plain text document atodiad (config-xen) > > The XEN config option is selected from the i386 subarch menu by > > choosing the X86_XEN "Xen-compatible" subarch. > > You need this as well. At least if I read the logic right with regards > to Xen and traps it is safe to do the following (although probably not > safe to run Xen on such a physical system anyway) Yes. In our tree, we have a config option which completely removes all the hardware idt table code (X86_NO_IDT) and stores the trap table as a table suitable to pass directly to the hypervisor. That's not so useful if you want to build a kernel which can run both on a hypervisor and on native. I guess you would need to disable the X86_F00F_BUG code at runtime in such a kernel. For the non-runtime case, I wonder if it's preferable to disable X86_F00F_BUG like you suggest or if it would be better to disable the cpu types listed? christian > > Signed-off-by: Alan Cox > > --- arch/i386/Kconfig.cpu~ 2006-05-10 15:51:44.956941304 +0100 > +++ arch/i386/Kconfig.cpu 2006-05-10 15:51:44.956941304 +0100 > @@ -251,7 +251,7 @@ > > config X86_F00F_BUG > bool > - depends on M586MMX || M586TSC || M586 || M486 || M386 > + depends on ( M586MMX || M586TSC || M586 || M486 || M386 ) && !XEN > default y > > config X86_WP_WORKS_OK > > - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/