On 18.07.2011, at 23:56, Scott Wood wrote: > On Mon, 18 Jul 2011 23:49:57 +0200 > Alexander Graf <agraf@xxxxxxx> wrote: > >> >> On 18.07.2011, at 23:43, Scott Wood wrote: >> >>> On Mon, 18 Jul 2011 23:37:50 +0200 >>> Alexander Graf <agraf@xxxxxxx> wrote: >>> >>>> I guess I'm merely not understanding why we have the non-way bits set in TLB0 entries, but not in TLB1 ones :). Do we pass in the real array index? >>> >>> KVM internally uses the full TLB index (and unfortunately calls it esel) in >>> some places, such as kvmppc_e500_tlb_index. But we don't want to leak that >>> to the guest. >> >> That's what I figured. So can we guarantee that internally esel for TLB1 is always < TLB1_NUM_ENTRIES? If so, we don't need to mask it. If not, we should. > > Yes, kvmppc_e500_tlb_index will always return an entry number that is less > than the number of entries in that tlb. Ok :). Good then. Slightly confusing code though ;). Alex -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm-ppc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
