On Sat, Oct 28 2017 at 2:45:59 pm BST, Dongjiu Geng <gengdongjiu@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> For this matching, switch expression uses fault type which is
> not {I,D}FSC value, but the case expression uses {I,D}FSC,
> they are incompatible. So change the switch expression to
> use {I,D}FSC.
I'm sorry, but I can't manage to parse this commit message. How about
something like this?
"kvm_vcpu_dabt_isextabt() tries to match a full fault syndrome, but
calls kvm_vcpu_trap_get_fault_type() that only returns the fault class,
thus reducing the scope of the check. This doesn't cause any observable
bug yet as we end-up matching a closely related syndrome for which we
return the same value.
Using kvm_vcpu_trap_get_fault() instead fixes it for good"
Otherwise:
Acked-by: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@xxxxxxx>
M.
--
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny.
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
