Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH-v2] xen: Don't call arch_trigger_all_cpu_backtrace in dom0(pvm)

2013-05-15 Thread Ian Campbell
On Wed, 2013-05-15 at 16:40 +0800, Zhenzhong Duan wrote: > On 2013-04-10 00:36, Ian Campbell wrote: > > On Mon, 2013-04-08 at 08:42 +0100, Jan Beulich wrote: > > On 07.04.13 at 07:54, Zhenzhong Duan wrote: > >>> nmi isn't supported in dom0, fallback to general all cpu backtrace code. > >>

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH-v2] xen: Don't call arch_trigger_all_cpu_backtrace in dom0(pvm)

2013-05-15 Thread Stefan Bader
On 08.04.2013 09:42, Jan Beulich wrote: On 07.04.13 at 07:54, Zhenzhong Duan wrote: >> nmi isn't supported in dom0, fallback to general all cpu backtrace code. > > Since when is sending NMIs not supported, and since when is this > Dom0-specific? If you want to deal with this, you should do

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH-v2] xen: Don't call arch_trigger_all_cpu_backtrace in dom0(pvm)

2013-05-15 Thread Zhenzhong Duan
On 2013-04-10 00:36, Ian Campbell wrote: On Mon, 2013-04-08 at 08:42 +0100, Jan Beulich wrote: On 07.04.13 at 07:54, Zhenzhong Duan wrote: nmi isn't supported in dom0, fallback to general all cpu backtrace code. Since when is sending NMIs not supported, and since when is this Dom0-specific?

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH-v2] xen: Don't call arch_trigger_all_cpu_backtrace in dom0(pvm)

2013-05-15 Thread Zhenzhong Duan
On 2013-04-10 00:36, Ian Campbell wrote: On Mon, 2013-04-08 at 08:42 +0100, Jan Beulich wrote: On 07.04.13 at 07:54, Zhenzhong Duan zhenzhong.d...@oracle.com wrote: nmi isn't supported in dom0, fallback to general all cpu backtrace code. Since when is sending NMIs not supported, and since

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH-v2] xen: Don't call arch_trigger_all_cpu_backtrace in dom0(pvm)

2013-05-15 Thread Stefan Bader
On 08.04.2013 09:42, Jan Beulich wrote: On 07.04.13 at 07:54, Zhenzhong Duan zhenzhong.d...@oracle.com wrote: nmi isn't supported in dom0, fallback to general all cpu backtrace code. Since when is sending NMIs not supported, and since when is this Dom0-specific? If you want to deal with

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH-v2] xen: Don't call arch_trigger_all_cpu_backtrace in dom0(pvm)

2013-05-15 Thread Ian Campbell
On Wed, 2013-05-15 at 16:40 +0800, Zhenzhong Duan wrote: On 2013-04-10 00:36, Ian Campbell wrote: On Mon, 2013-04-08 at 08:42 +0100, Jan Beulich wrote: On 07.04.13 at 07:54, Zhenzhong Duan zhenzhong.d...@oracle.com wrote: nmi isn't supported in dom0, fallback to general all cpu backtrace

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH-v2] xen: Don't call arch_trigger_all_cpu_backtrace in dom0(pvm)

2013-04-09 Thread Ian Campbell
On Mon, 2013-04-08 at 08:42 +0100, Jan Beulich wrote: > >>> On 07.04.13 at 07:54, Zhenzhong Duan wrote: > > nmi isn't supported in dom0, fallback to general all cpu backtrace code. > > Since when is sending NMIs not supported, and since when is this > Dom0-specific? If you want to deal with

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH-v2] xen: Don't call arch_trigger_all_cpu_backtrace in dom0(pvm)

2013-04-09 Thread Ian Campbell
On Mon, 2013-04-08 at 08:42 +0100, Jan Beulich wrote: On 07.04.13 at 07:54, Zhenzhong Duan zhenzhong.d...@oracle.com wrote: nmi isn't supported in dom0, fallback to general all cpu backtrace code. Since when is sending NMIs not supported, and since when is this Dom0-specific? If you want

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH-v2] xen: Don't call arch_trigger_all_cpu_backtrace in dom0(pvm)

2013-04-08 Thread Jan Beulich
>>> On 07.04.13 at 07:54, Zhenzhong Duan wrote: > nmi isn't supported in dom0, fallback to general all cpu backtrace code. Since when is sending NMIs not supported, and since when is this Dom0-specific? If you want to deal with this, you should do so properly: Special case sending NMIs in the

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH-v2] xen: Don't call arch_trigger_all_cpu_backtrace in dom0(pvm)

2013-04-08 Thread Jan Beulich
On 07.04.13 at 07:54, Zhenzhong Duan zhenzhong.d...@oracle.com wrote: nmi isn't supported in dom0, fallback to general all cpu backtrace code. Since when is sending NMIs not supported, and since when is this Dom0-specific? If you want to deal with this, you should do so properly: Special case