From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
To: Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com>, Xiaoyao Li <xiaoyao.li@intel.com>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Richard Henderson <rth@twiddle.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] i386/cpu: Don't add unavailable_features to env->user_features
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2020 14:01:53 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <99c4c60f-1d4f-6157-0390-a07f0504be24@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200713184841.GF780932@habkost.net>
On 13/07/20 20:48, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 01:44:36AM +0800, Xiaoyao Li wrote:
>> Features unavailable due to absent of their dependent features should
>> not be added to env->user_features. env->user_features only contains the
>> feature explicity specified with -feature/+feature by user.
>>
>> Fixes: 99e24dbdaa68 ("target/i386: introduce generic feature dependency mechanism")
>> Signed-off-by: Xiaoyao Li <xiaoyao.li@intel.com>
>
> Paolo, do you remember why that line existed? It doesn't make
> sense to me.
>
> There are exactly 2 lines of code reading user_features, and both
> of them are inside x86_cpu_expand_features() above this hunk.
I think it was just to be safe in case in the future something else adds
features automatically, in the same way as the cpu->max_features case:
env->features[w] |=
x86_cpu_get_supported_feature_word(w, cpu->migratable) &
~env->user_features[w] &
~feature_word_info[w].no_autoenable_flags;
It would prevent the unavailable dependent features from being added.
But yeah, it would just be enough to place it above this hunk.
Paolo
> Reviewed-by: Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com>
>
>> ---
>> target/i386/cpu.c | 1 -
>> 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/target/i386/cpu.c b/target/i386/cpu.c
>> index 9812d5747f35..fb1de1bd6165 100644
>> --- a/target/i386/cpu.c
>> +++ b/target/i386/cpu.c
>> @@ -6370,7 +6370,6 @@ static void x86_cpu_expand_features(X86CPU *cpu, Error **errp)
>> unavailable_features & env->user_features[d->to.index],
>> "This feature depends on other features that were not requested");
>>
>> - env->user_features[d->to.index] |= unavailable_features;
>> env->features[d->to.index] &= ~unavailable_features;
>> }
>> }
>> --
>> 2.18.4
>>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-07-27 12:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-07-13 17:44 [PATCH 0/2] Fixes for env->user_features Xiaoyao Li
2020-07-13 17:44 ` [PATCH 1/2] i368/cpu: Clear env->user_features after loading versioned CPU model Xiaoyao Li
2020-07-13 18:44 ` Eduardo Habkost
2020-07-13 17:44 ` [PATCH 2/2] i386/cpu: Don't add unavailable_features to env->user_features Xiaoyao Li
2020-07-13 18:48 ` Eduardo Habkost
2020-07-27 12:01 ` Paolo Bonzini [this message]
2020-07-13 18:08 ` [PATCH 0/2] Fixes for env->user_features no-reply
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=99c4c60f-1d4f-6157-0390-a07f0504be24@redhat.com \
--to=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=ehabkost@redhat.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=rth@twiddle.net \
--cc=xiaoyao.li@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).