On 14/08/2025 9:55 am, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 13.08.2025 13:25, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>> On 12/08/2025 10:19 am, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>> On 08.08.2025 22:23, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>>>> Since commit a35816b5cae8 ("x86/traps: Introduce early_traps_init() and
>>>> simplify setup"), load_system_tables() is called later on the BSP, so the
>>>> SYS_STATE_early_boot check can be dropped from the safety BUG_ON().
>>>>
>>>> Move the BUILD_BUG_ON() into build_assertions(),
>>> I'm not quite convinced of this move - having the related BUILD_BUG_ON()
>>> and BUG_ON() next to each other would seem better to me.
>> I don't see a specific reason for them to be together, and the comment
>> explains what's going on.
>>
>> With FRED, we want a related BUILD_BUG_ON(), but there's no equivalent
>> BUG_ON() because MSR_RSP_SL0 will #GP on being misaligned.
> That BUILD_BUG_ON() could then sit next to the MSR write? Unless of course
> that ends up sitting in an assembly source.It's the bottom hunk in patch 14, which you've looked at now. Personally, I think both BUILD_BUG_ON()'s should be together, because they are related. ~Andrew
