On 18.07.2011, at 18:12, Scott Wood wrote: > On Mon, 18 Jul 2011 11:16:10 +0200 > Alexander Graf <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> On 08.07.2011, at 01:41, Scott Wood wrote: >> >>> It should contain the way, not the absolute TLB0 index. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Scott Wood <[email protected]> >>> --- >>> arch/powerpc/kvm/e500_tlb.c | 3 +++ >>> 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kvm/e500_tlb.c b/arch/powerpc/kvm/e500_tlb.c >>> index 13c432e..2e99d66 100644 >>> --- a/arch/powerpc/kvm/e500_tlb.c >>> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kvm/e500_tlb.c >>> @@ -788,6 +788,9 @@ int kvmppc_e500_emul_tlbsx(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, int >>> rb) >>> } >>> >>> if (gtlbe) { >>> + if (tlbsel == 0) >>> + esel &= KVM_E500_TLB0_WAY_NUM - 1; >> >> Is it guaranteed that MAS0_ESEL always returns at most the TLB1 index nr? > > What's the relevance of TLB1 here? > > For TLB0, esel is supposed to contain the way, not the index into the full > TLB.
Well, for both esel is supposed to contain the way, just that for TLB1 it happens to be the index, or am I misunderstanding something here? The question was basically why we need to mask out on TLB0, but not on TLB1. Alex -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm-ppc" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
