Re: [PATCH 01/14] x86/xstate: Update stale assertions in fpu_x{rstor,save}()

2024-10-29 Thread Alejandro Vallejo
On Tue Oct 29, 2024 at 8:13 AM GMT, Jan Beulich wrote: > On 28.10.2024 18:16, Andrew Cooper wrote: > > On 28/10/2024 3:49 pm, Alejandro Vallejo wrote: > >> The asserts' intent was to establish whether the xsave instruction was > >> usable or not, which at the time was strictly given by the presence

Re: [PATCH 01/14] x86/xstate: Update stale assertions in fpu_x{rstor,save}()

2024-10-29 Thread Jan Beulich
On 28.10.2024 18:16, Andrew Cooper wrote: > On 28/10/2024 3:49 pm, Alejandro Vallejo wrote: >> The asserts' intent was to establish whether the xsave instruction was >> usable or not, which at the time was strictly given by the presence of >> the xsave area. After edb48e76458b("x86/fpu: Combine fpu

Re: [PATCH 01/14] x86/xstate: Update stale assertions in fpu_x{rstor,save}()

2024-10-28 Thread Andrew Cooper
On 28/10/2024 3:49 pm, Alejandro Vallejo wrote: > The asserts' intent was to establish whether the xsave instruction was > usable or not, which at the time was strictly given by the presence of > the xsave area. After edb48e76458b("x86/fpu: Combine fpu_ctxt and > xsave_area in arch_vcpu"), that are

[PATCH 01/14] x86/xstate: Update stale assertions in fpu_x{rstor,save}()

2024-10-28 Thread Alejandro Vallejo
The asserts' intent was to establish whether the xsave instruction was usable or not, which at the time was strictly given by the presence of the xsave area. After edb48e76458b("x86/fpu: Combine fpu_ctxt and xsave_area in arch_vcpu"), that area is always present a more relevant assert is that the h