> -----Original Message----- > From: Eduardo Habkost [mailto:ehabkost@xxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Friday, May 11, 2018 9:12 AM > To: Moger, Babu <Babu.Moger@xxxxxxx> > Cc: mst@xxxxxxxxxx; marcel@xxxxxxxxxx; pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx; > rth@xxxxxxxxxxx; mtosatti@xxxxxxxxxx; geoff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; > kash@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; qemu-devel@xxxxxxxxxx; kvm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v7 7/9] i386: Add support for > CPUID_8000_001E for AMD > > On Tue, May 08, 2018 at 03:02:07PM +0000, Moger, Babu wrote: > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Eduardo Habkost [mailto:ehabkost@xxxxxxxxxx] > > > Sent: Tuesday, May 8, 2018 9:17 AM > > > To: Moger, Babu <Babu.Moger@xxxxxxx> > > > Cc: mst@xxxxxxxxxx; marcel@xxxxxxxxxx; pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx; > > > rth@xxxxxxxxxxx; mtosatti@xxxxxxxxxx; geoff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; > > > kash@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; qemu-devel@xxxxxxxxxx; kvm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > > Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v7 7/9] i386: Add support for > > > CPUID_8000_001E for AMD > > > > > > On Mon, May 07, 2018 at 11:44:31PM +0000, Moger, Babu wrote: > > > [...] > > > > > > + > > > > > > /* > > > > > > * Encode cache info for CPUID[0x80000006].ECX and > > > > > CPUID[0x80000006].EDX > > > > > > * @l3 can be NULL. > > > > > > @@ -4105,6 +4111,14 @@ void cpu_x86_cpuid(CPUX86State *env, > > > > > uint32_t index, uint32_t count, > > > > > > break; > > > > > > } > > > > > > break; > > > > > > + case 0x8000001E: > > > > > > + assert(cpu->core_id <= 255); > > > > > > > > > > Where's the code that ensures this assert() line can't be > > > > > triggered by any command-line configuration? > > > > > > > > I did not understand this. Can you please elaborate. Thanks > > > > > > The user must not be able to trigger an assert(), so we need to > > > ensure that core_id will never be larger than 255. Is there > > > existing code that ensures that? > > > > I see that max_cpus is set to 255 and also there are checks to make sure > core_id does not go above 255. > > I verified it while testing. So, probably we don't need assert here. Radim > asked me to add this assert. > > I can remove it if no abjections. > > Sorry for not replying to this before: no objection to the > assert(), especially considering it will trigger very early on > initialization if we break it one day. Ok. No problem. I will add it back and send a v9 version. Please let me know if you have any other feedback for v8 version(sent yesterday). > > -- > Eduardo
