From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Paolo Bonzini Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/6] KVM: x86: Wrong assertion on paging_tmpl.h Date: Wed, 08 Oct 2014 11:17:20 +0200 Message-ID: <54350120.8070204@redhat.com> References: <1412099359-5316-1-git-send-email-namit@cs.technion.ac.il> <1412099359-5316-6-git-send-email-namit@cs.technion.ac.il> <20141001162603.GE12085@potion.brq.redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Nadav Amit , kvm@vger.kernel.org To: Nadav Amit , =?UTF-8?B?UmFkaW0gS3LEjW3DocWZ?= Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:50908 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753664AbaJHJR3 (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Oct 2014 05:17:29 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Il 01/10/2014 19:14, Nadav Amit ha scritto: >>>>> + ASSERT(!is_long_mode(vcpu) || is_pae(vcpu)); > I am ok with removing the assertion. Due to the multiple changes, I > lost track what it was supposed to do. Anyhow, removing the second > part was required since there are no reserved bits in non-pae (they > are ignored - not reserved). It becomes a bit clearer if you apply De Morgan: ASSERT(!(is_long_mode(vcpu) && !is_pae(vcpu))); or almost equivalently WARN_ON(is_long_mode(vcpu) && !is_pae(vcpu)); We should change ASSERT to positive logic (MMU_WARN_ON for example). Paolo -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJUNQEgAAoJEBRUblpOawnX9hwH/AghSII0PKLF1RDC9GqvKBb6 m+UYFmYxcJjidhsvcZuNg/pRuRfJYNOFoJWO13eTYUL/eSnxXEZqy1nQTneFUFjm WKFebVc5FWc8DAXpEehrHuKUn/QmOEDj8qo41Bf0kHiptzh6W1jIEjH1AaPIwta3 5MFmFN6T+BmU1pBqOgGY5OJkAQnM9WmnsjsFDRJEFW520GP1Xvws+XxRA31Q6Qol 1qLvK2kSeuCUlGDwNWTFT0w79wQwpwuXCJfII5vzRp02pVgDKtl6sNLyKKGthxtv ONPpn0Uq0mFRbxasPk8glwqaZtqRNJKG+jysSYEf3aBmMhP4hAcGoADP6C5Umj8= =7S50 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----