On 04.12.2019 17:18, Roger Pau Monné wrote: > On Wed, Dec 04, 2019 at 05:11:42PM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote: >> On 04.12.2019 16:12, Roger Pau Monne wrote: >>> @@ -130,7 +143,7 @@ unsigned long pv_make_cr4(const struct vcpu *v) >>> */ >>> if ( d->arch.pv.pcid ) >>> cr4 |= X86_CR4_PCIDE; >>> - else if ( !d->arch.pv.xpti ) >>> + else if ( !d->arch.pv.xpti && opt_global_pages ) >>> cr4 |= X86_CR4_PGE; >> >> I'm sorry for noticing this only now, but what about XEN_MINIMAL_CR4, >> which includes X86_CR4_PGE? > > I've tried removing PGE from XEN_MINIMAL_CR4 but it made no noticeable > performance difference, so I left it as-is.
My concern isn't about performance, but correctness. I admit I forgot for a moment that we now always write CR4 (unless the cached value matches the intended new one). Yet mmu_cr4_features (starting out as XEN_MINIMAL_CR4) is still of concern. I think this at least requires extending the description to discuss the correctness. Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
