On 05.03.2021 16:47, Andrew Cooper wrote: > On 05/03/2021 15:37, Jan Beulich wrote: >> We can't make correctness of our own behavior dependent upon a >> hypervisor underneath us correctly telling us the true physical address >> with hardware uses. Without knowing this, we can't be certain reserved >> bit faults can actually be observed. Therefore, besides evaluating the >> number of address bits when deciding whether to use the optimization, >> also check whether we're running virtualized ourselves. > > I think it would be helpful to point out why we can't even probe at boot > - the behaviour may genuinely change as we migrate, and if we ever end > up on an IceLake system levelled down for compatibility with older CPUs, > the "paddr_bits < PADDR_BITS" check will malfunction in an unsafe way.
I've added a sentence to this effect. >> Requested-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.coop...@citrix.com> >> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com> > > Acked-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.coop...@citrix.com> Thanks. Jan
