Re: [PATCH 1/5] Skip timer works.patch

[Zachary Amsden]

Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 30, 2006 at 12:54:55PM -0800, Zachary Amsden wrote:
>   
> > Andi Kleen wrote:
> >     
> > > no_timer_check. But it's only there on x86-64 in mainline - although there
> > > were some patches to add it to i386 too.
> > >  
> > >       
> > I can rename to match the x86-64 name.
> >     
>
> I will do that in my tree.
>
>   
> > > > That is what this patch is building towards, but the boot option is
> > > > "free", so why not?  In the meantime, it helps non-paravirt kernels
> > > > booted in a VM.
> > > >    
> > > >         
> > > Hmm, you meant they paniced before?  If they just fail a few tests
> > > that is not particularly worrying (real hardware does that often too)
> > >  
> > >       
> > Yes, they sometimes fail to boot, and the failure message used to ask us 
> > to pester mingo.
> >     
>
> I still think we should figure that out automatically. Letting
> the Hypervisor pass magic boot options seems somehow unclean.
>
> But i suppose it will only work for the paravirtualized case,
> not for the case of kernel running "native" under a hypervisor
> I suppose? Or does that one not panic?
>   

That is the one that can panic, for now.  Fixing the paravirtualized 
case is easy, but we can't assume paravirtualization just yet.

Zach


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/