From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from e23smtp03.au.ibm.com (e23smtp03.au.ibm.com [202.81.31.145]) (using TLSv1 with cipher CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C49061A1E07 for ; Wed, 2 Sep 2015 08:31:26 +1000 (AEST) Received: from /spool/local by e23smtp03.au.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Wed, 2 Sep 2015 08:31:25 +1000 Received: from d23relay09.au.ibm.com (d23relay09.au.ibm.com [9.185.63.181]) by d23dlp01.au.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF2CF2CE802D for ; Wed, 2 Sep 2015 08:31:22 +1000 (EST) Received: from d23av03.au.ibm.com (d23av03.au.ibm.com [9.190.234.97]) by d23relay09.au.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id t81MVEAd47644848 for ; Wed, 2 Sep 2015 08:31:22 +1000 Received: from d23av03.au.ibm.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by d23av03.au.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id t81MUo9c016505 for ; Wed, 2 Sep 2015 08:30:50 +1000 Message-ID: <1441146625.2668.53.camel@au1.ibm.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: ppc: Fix size of the PSPB register From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt Reply-To: benh@au1.ibm.com To: Paul Mackerras , Thomas Huth Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, Alexander Graf , kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org Date: Wed, 02 Sep 2015 08:30:25 +1000 In-Reply-To: <20150901222434.GA23007@fergus.ozlabs.ibm.com> References: <1441143678-14295-1-git-send-email-thuth@redhat.com> <20150901222434.GA23007@fergus.ozlabs.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Wed, 2015-09-02 at 08:24 +1000, Paul Mackerras wrote: > On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 11:41:18PM +0200, Thomas Huth wrote: > > The size of the Problem State Priority Boost Register is only > > 32 bits, so let's change the type of the corresponding variable > > accordingly to avoid future trouble. > > Since we're already using lwz/stw in the assembly code in > book3s_hv_rmhandlers.S, this is actually a bug fix, isn't it? > How did you find it? Did you observe a failure of some kind, or did > you just find it by code inspection? Won't the fix break migration ? Unless qemu doens't migrate it ... > Paul. > _______________________________________________ > Linuxppc-dev mailing list > Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org > https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev