On 08/07/2016 17:01, Dr. David Alan Gilbert (git) wrote:
> + uint32_t host_phys_bits = x86_host_phys_bits();
> + static bool warned;
> +
> + if (cpu->host_phys_bits) {
> + /* The user asked for us to use the host physical bits */
> + cpu->phys_bits = host_phys_bits;
> + }
> +
> + /* Print a warning if the user set it to a value that's not the
> + * host value.
> + */
> + if (cpu->phys_bits != host_phys_bits && cpu->phys_bits != 0 &&
> + !warned) {
> + error_report("Warning: Host physical bits (%u)"
> + " does not match phys-bits property (%u)",
> + host_phys_bits, cpu->phys_bits);
> + warned = true;
> + }
> +
> + if (cpu->phys_bits &&
> + (cpu->phys_bits > TARGET_PHYS_ADDR_SPACE_BITS ||
> + cpu->phys_bits < 32)) {
> error_setg(errp, "phys-bits should be between 32 and %u "
> " (but is %u)",
> TARGET_PHYS_ADDR_SPACE_BITS,
> cpu->phys_bits);
Michael Tsirkin suggested a way to support guest-phys-bits <
host-phys-bits in KVM. I plan to implement it soonish. In the
meanwhile I guess this patch is fine, we can refine it later.
Paolo
