On 16/06/2016 22:14, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > This is necessary only when phys_bits is higher on the > destination, right? > > Should we really default this to true? I would like to enable > this hack only when really necessary. Except when using host's > phys_bits (phys-bits=0), is there any valid reason to expect > higher phys-bits on the destination?
It would need a property even if you did it only for phys-bits==0, and then it's simpler to just do it always. The bits are reserved anyway, so we can do whatever we want with them. In fact I think it's weird for the architecture to make them must-be-zero, it might even make more sense to make them must-be-one... It's a mask after all, and there's no way to access out-of-range physical addresses. Paolo
