On 16/09/2019 12:17, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 13.09.2019 21:27, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>> -static void intel_xc_cpuid_policy(const struct cpuid_domain_info *info,
>> - const unsigned int *input, unsigned int
>> *regs)
>> -{
>> - switch ( input[0] )
>> - {
>> - case 0x00000004:
>> - /*
>> - * EAX[31:26] is Maximum Cores Per Package (minus one).
>> - * Update to reflect vLAPIC_ID = vCPU_ID * 2.
>> - */
>> - regs[0] = (((regs[0] & 0x7c000000u) << 1) | 0x04000000u |
>> - (regs[0] & 0x3ffu));
>> - regs[3] &= 0x3ffu;
> I think you want to mention that the removal of this masking is
> intentional, for it looking bogus. With an appropriate addition to
> the description
> Reviewed-by: Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com>
As I said before, I fail to see how that isn't covered by the blanket
"almost all of this is redundant" statement.
There are other masks which are dropped, and calling this one out in
isolation seems wrong. Observe that the comment discussing topology
only talks about eax, and not edx.
~Andrew
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
