| commit | 4ed3d478c63dc65a02eba774c35116618ea5ff10 | |
| author | Daniel P. Berrange <berrange@redhat.com> | |
| Tue, 9 May 2017 13:27:35 +0000 (9 14:27 +0100) | ||
| committer | Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com> | |
| Thu, 11 May 2017 13:54:04 +0000 (11 10:54 -0300) | ||
| tree | 79441f5428a795b00e8836bf7969b36f8361848c | treesnapshot (tar.gz zip) |
| parent | 76d20ea0f1b26ebd5da2f5fb2fdf3250cde887bb | commitdiff |
i386: rewrite way CPUID index is validated
Change the nested if statements into a flat format, to make
it clearer what validation / capping is being performed on
different CPUID index values.
NB this changes behaviour when "index > env->cpuid_xlevel2".
This won't have any guest-visible effect because no there is
no CPUID[0xC0000001] feature supported by TCG, and KVM code
will never call cpu_x86_cpuid() with such an index value.
Reviewed-by: Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel P. Berrange <berrange@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <20170509132736.10071-2-berrange@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com>
Change the nested if statements into a flat format, to make
it clearer what validation / capping is being performed on
different CPUID index values.
NB this changes behaviour when "index > env->cpuid_xlevel2".
This won't have any guest-visible effect because no there is
no CPUID[0xC0000001] feature supported by TCG, and KVM code
will never call cpu_x86_cpuid() with such an index value.
Reviewed-by: Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel P. Berrange <berrange@redhat.com>
Message-Id: <20170509132736.10071-2-berrange@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost@redhat.com>
| target/i386/cpu.c | diffblobblamehistory |