On 07.06.2023 16:24, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> 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?)
Yes.
> I would be happy with that also.
Oh, even better then.
Jan
