Glauber Costa wrote: >>> unsigned long rip = vcpu->arch.rip; >>> unsigned long rip_linear; >>> >>> - rip_linear = rip + get_segment_base(vcpu, VCPU_SREG_CS); >>> - >>> if (reported) >>> return; >>> >>> + rip_linear = rip + get_segment_base(vcpu, VCPU_SREG_CS); >>> + >>> emulator_read_std(rip_linear, (void *)opcodes, 4, vcpu); >>> >>> printk(KERN_ERR "emulation failed (%s) rip %lx %02x %02x %02x %02x\n", >>> -- >>> 1.5.4.5 >>> >> Why return immediately? Shouldn't we report on failure whenever it >> occurs (i.e. by rather removing the if condition)? >> >> > the kernel ring buffer would be full very quickly, and this is not a > strong enough reason to do that ;-) > Most of the messages would be the same. > > What I do think would be useful, and even planned to do (just have > more priority things waiting), is to move > the checking field to the vcpu struct. With the current setup, if you > kill your guest, set things up again, and run it, > you won't see any messages, even if it fails. > > So the warning should really be once in the lifetime of the virtual > machine, not once in the lifetime of the kvm module. > > > I've changed it to use printk_ratelimit(). -- I have a truly marvellous patch that fixes the bug which this signature is too narrow to contain. _______________________________________________ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
