On 25/05/18 07:02, Jan Beulich wrote:
> We should index an L1 table with an L1 index.
>
> Reported-by: Simon Gaiser <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <[email protected]>

Indeed we should.

Reviewed-by: Andrew Cooper <[email protected]>, and I've got a
followup patch to fix some stale comments.

> ---
> v2: Entirely different.
>
> --- a/xen/arch/x86/smpboot.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/smpboot.c
> @@ -883,7 +883,7 @@ static void cleanup_cpu_root_pgt(unsigne
>          l2_pgentry_t *l2t = l3e_to_l2e(l3t[l3_table_offset(stub_linear)]);
>          l1_pgentry_t *l1t = l2e_to_l1e(l2t[l2_table_offset(stub_linear)]);
>  
> -        l1t[l2_table_offset(stub_linear)] = l1e_empty();
> +        l1t[l1_table_offset(stub_linear)] = l1e_empty();
>      }
>  }
>  
>
>


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel

Reply via email to