From a83a2ee1b7746cae7e0f7fd641e74c578d7f75e8 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Tim Deegan Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2006 11:52:38 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] [XEN] Don't pass spurious reserved-bit faults to the guest since x86_64 linux can't handle them. Signed-off-by: Tim Deegan --- xen/arch/x86/mm/shadow/multi.c | 4 ++++ 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/mm/shadow/multi.c b/xen/arch/x86/mm/shadow/multi.c index 7da1b7a6ac..c8dfa28d6a 100644 --- a/xen/arch/x86/mm/shadow/multi.c +++ b/xen/arch/x86/mm/shadow/multi.c @@ -2623,6 +2623,10 @@ static int sh_page_fault(struct vcpu *v, * Fall through to the normal fault handing logic */ perfc_incrc(shadow_fault_fast_fail); SHADOW_PRINTK("fast path false alarm!\n"); + /* Don't pass the reserved-bit bit: if we look at the fault + * below and decide to pass it to the guest, the reserved-bit + * bit won't make sense there. */ + regs->error_code &= ~PFEC_reserved_bit; } } #endif /* SHOPT_FAST_FAULT_PATH */ -- 2.30.2