Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 22 Aug 2012 16:54:29 +0800 | From | Alex Shi <> | Subject | Re: apparent regressions from TLB range flushing page set |
| |
On 08/22/2012 03:39 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> Alex Shi <alex.shi@intel.com> 08/22/12 5:24 AM >>> >> On 08/20/2012 10:12 PM, Jan Beulich wrote: >> I was thought you have 'Agreed' for xen part code. :) > > I had agreed to it being done the right way, and I had pointed out the > problem once. I can't say for sure that I looked at the most recent rev > closely enough to spot the issue still being unfixed. > >>> For one, while TLB_FLUSH_ALL gets passed as 'end' argument to >>> flush_tlb_others(), the Xen code was made to check its 'start' >>> parameter. >> >> Do you mean need the following change? --untested. > > Yes. I'd question though whether for that special case it shouldn't be > start _and_ end to get passed the special value.
Actually the special value is already there in old code. so, what's your meaning of the question?
> > Jan >
| |