From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BE001C77B7C for ; Thu, 3 Jul 2025 07:32:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1uXEPd-00022X-Da; Thu, 03 Jul 2025 03:31:17 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1uXEPc-00022O-DH for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 03 Jul 2025 03:31:16 -0400 Received: from mgamail.intel.com ([192.198.163.10]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1uXEPZ-0006M7-Ms for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 03 Jul 2025 03:31:16 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1751527874; x=1783063874; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=umhNYtMq0xc0JruKddyKpbWr9UG6Y0MImL389MvdeJA=; b=RP5Y0u4zHqh1Pazyv9TWipgDwhnmLxHNd3QMiCaq0nKkomgiMBebaFzc Uc7/ygH6ADtQMvnDSKKOhziUE7PUOBYlrq7zaiIWY6v95loWNkSNqez7P SMumZnvDP7voW8g3BFkPYG3D+uZjl9IbHdip/gH3BEDF3isvvS6jbY+Ec 2BL3RY5z+w62+anjxr7WQLzg2t57D2B4qYM8HuRTGmZ6FtFK3CeseEFNr 1CCGwQ9mNxQcfhg/fhDOTwbNE4/9omPWFNtuk8hSkltTLOsKNIFpAZIgh wVH4FhQbyGbVDGHypxh+Rg/G+LHuJAkEjrmy3SJnCIpHPDBnsiF43OsyV g==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: L69C+rcdTAS1QxfBwOFJFw== X-CSE-MsgGUID: d1haSGi8TvKbtvAkwg6NUg== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6800,10657,11482"; a="65189365" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.16,283,1744095600"; d="scan'208";a="65189365" Received: from fmviesa004.fm.intel.com ([10.60.135.144]) by fmvoesa104.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 03 Jul 2025 00:31:11 -0700 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: duyQJDzBSf2hK3L8jDImjw== X-CSE-MsgGUID: WZlE00q1THa5jVLuCDVe6g== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.16,283,1744095600"; d="scan'208";a="159800370" Received: from liuzhao-optiplex-7080.sh.intel.com (HELO localhost) ([10.239.160.39]) by fmviesa004.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 03 Jul 2025 00:31:07 -0700 Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2025 15:52:33 +0800 From: Zhao Liu To: "Mi, Dapeng" Cc: Paolo Bonzini , Marcelo Tosatti , "Michael S . Tsirkin" , Daniel P =?iso-8859-1?Q?=2E_Berrang=E9?= , Igor Mammedov , Marcel Apfelbaum , Richard Henderson , Eduardo Habkost , Philippe =?iso-8859-1?Q?Mathieu-Daud=E9?= , Babu Moger , Ewan Hai , Pu Wen , Tao Su , Yi Lai , Dapeng Mi , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 08/16] i386/cpu: Fix CPUID[0x80000006] for Intel CPU Message-ID: References: <20250620092734.1576677-1-zhao1.liu@intel.com> <20250620092734.1576677-9-zhao1.liu@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Received-SPF: pass client-ip=192.198.163.10; envelope-from=zhao1.liu@intel.com; helo=mgamail.intel.com X-Spam_score_int: -41 X-Spam_score: -4.2 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.2 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED=0.237, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org > > static void encode_cache_cpuid80000006(CPUCacheInfo *l2, > > CPUCacheInfo *l3, > > - uint32_t *ecx, uint32_t *edx) > > + uint32_t *ecx, uint32_t *edx, > > + bool lines_per_tag_supported) > > { > > assert(l2->size % 1024 == 0); > > assert(l2->associativity > 0); > > - assert(l2->lines_per_tag > 0); > > - assert(l2->line_size > 0); > > why remove the assert for l2->line_size? Good catch! My bad... > > + assert(lines_per_tag_supported ? > > + l2->lines_per_tag > 0 : l2->lines_per_tag == 0); > > *ecx = ((l2->size / 1024) << 16) | > > - (AMD_ENC_ASSOC(l2->associativity) << 12) | > > + (X86_ENC_ASSOC(l2->associativity) << 12) | > > (l2->lines_per_tag << 8) | (l2->line_size); > >