>>> On 26.08.15 at 12:43, <andrew.coop...@citrix.com> wrote: > On 25/08/15 11:54, Shuai Ruan wrote: >> @@ -246,8 +249,9 @@ static void xc_cpuid_config_xsave( >> regs[1] = 512 + 64; /* FP/SSE + XSAVE.HEADER */ >> break; >> case 1: /* leaf 1 */ >> - regs[0] &= XSAVEOPT; >> - regs[1] = regs[2] = regs[3] = 0; >> + regs[0] &= (XSAVEOPT | XSAVEC | XGETBV1 | XSAVES); >> + regs[2] &= 0xe7; > > Shouldn't this 0xe7 be mask of xstate_feature bits?
And a few lines down there's also a similar hard coded 1. Please stay away from adding new literal numbers - if there are no suitable ones, introduce manifest constants. Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
