Re: [RFC PATCH] x86 NMI-safe INT3 and Page Fault (v2)

[Jeremy Fitzhardinge]

Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> * Jeremy Fitzhardinge (jeremy@xxxxxxxx) wrote:
>   
> > Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >     
> > > * Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > >   
> > >       
> > > > thanks Mathieu, i've picked this up into x86.git for more testing.
> > > >     
> > > >         
> > > ... but had to drop it due to missing PARAVIRT support which broke the 
> > > build. I guess on paravirt we could just initially define 
> > > INTERRUPT_RETURN_NMI_SAFE to iret, etc.?
> > >       
> > I have not yet implemented Xen's support for paravirtual NMI, so there's no 
> > scope for breaking anything from my perspective.  When I get around to NMI, 
> > I'll work around whatever's there.  I don't know if lguest or VMI has any 
> > guest NMI support.
> >
> >    J
> >
> >     
>
> I wonder if we could simply paravirtualize the popf instruction, which
> seems to be the only one requiring to run in ring 0.

Hm, I'd need to think about it more.  There's more to NMI's than just 
the popf.

   J

--
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/