On Wed, Jun 07, 2023 at 04:00:14PM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 07.06.2023 15:46, Roger Pau Monne wrote:
> > --- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/domain.c
> > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/domain.c
> > @@ -266,8 +266,8 @@ int arch_set_info_hvm_guest(struct vcpu *v, const
> > vcpu_hvm_context_t *ctx)
> >
> > if ( v->arch.hvm.guest_cr[4] & ~hvm_cr4_guest_valid_bits(d) )
> > {
> > - gprintk(XENLOG_ERR, "Bad CR4 value: %#016lx\n",
> > - v->arch.hvm.guest_cr[4]);
> > + gprintk(XENLOG_ERR, "Bad CR4 value: %#016lx (valid: %016lx)\n",
> > + v->arch.hvm.guest_cr[4], hvm_cr4_guest_valid_bits(d));
> > return -EINVAL;
> > }
> >
> > --- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c
> > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c
> > @@ -1018,8 +1018,8 @@ static int cf_check hvm_load_cpu_ctxt(struct domain
> > *d, hvm_domain_context_t *h)
> >
> > if ( ctxt.cr4 & ~hvm_cr4_guest_valid_bits(d) )
> > {
> > - printk(XENLOG_G_ERR "HVM%d restore: bad CR4 %#" PRIx64 "\n",
> > - d->domain_id, ctxt.cr4);
> > + printk(XENLOG_G_ERR "HVM%d restore: bad CR4 %#016lx (valid:
> > %016lx)\n",
>
> I'm not convinced printing a lot of leading zeros is really useful here.
> However, if you switch to that model, then all uses of the # modifier
> need to go away (in the earlier instance it would be nice if you also
> fixed the pre-existing issue then).
Hm, I've got those messed up. What would you be your preference then?
(%#lx?) I would be happy with that also.
Thanks, Roger.
