On Tue, Dec 19, 2023 at 05:23:36PM +0800, lixianglai wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 14, 2023 at 02:08:48PM +0800, xianglai li wrote: > > > +++ b/src/util/virhostcpu.c > > > @@ -579,7 +579,7 @@ virHostCPUParsePhysAddrSize(FILE *cpuinfo, unsigned int *addrsz) > > > char *str; > > > char *endptr; > > > > > > - if (!(str = STRSKIP(line, "address sizes"))) > > > + if (!(str = STRCASESKIP(line, "address sizes"))) > > > continue; > > > > So is the case different on loongarch than it is on other > > architectures? Weird. > > Yes, loongarch and x86 do have some similarities and differences in the cpu > Address space string, loongarch is "Address Sizes" under X86 is "address > sizes", Unfortunate choice on the kernel's part, but not much we can do about that I guess. The way you handled it is perfectly fine. > arm and other architectures should not have this identifier, At present, > only x86 architecture and sh architecture can enter the process, > > other architectures will directly return, and the superior call also needs > to allow the loongarch architecture. I will correct it in the next version Good catch! I hadn't even noticed that but it definitely needs to be addressed. > > > #elif !defined(WIN32) && \ > > > (defined(__x86_64__) || \ > > > defined(__i386__) || \ > > > - defined(__amd64__)) > > > + defined(__amd64__) || \ > > > + defined(__loongarch__)) > > > return virSysinfoReadDMI(); > > > > Does loongarch actually have DMI support? > > Yes, loongarch does support dmi. Excellent, just making sure :) -- Andrea Bolognani / Red Hat / Virtualization _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
