From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.6 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, NICE_REPLY_A,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 399CAC4363D for ; Fri, 2 Oct 2020 12:09:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.xenproject.org (lists.xenproject.org [192.237.175.120]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DB101206B2 for ; Fri, 2 Oct 2020 12:09:32 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=suse.com header.i=@suse.com header.b="AEQuF+O/" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org DB101206B2 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=suse.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org Received: from list by lists.xenproject.org with outflank-mailman.2005.5938 (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1kOJs8-0007iN-HG; Fri, 02 Oct 2020 12:09:12 +0000 X-Outflank-Mailman: Message body and most headers restored to incoming version Received: by outflank-mailman (output) from mailman id 2005.5938; Fri, 02 Oct 2020 12:09:12 +0000 X-BeenThere: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org List-Id: Xen developer discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org Precedence: list Sender: "Xen-devel" Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.xenproject.org) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1kOJs8-0007iG-Cr; Fri, 02 Oct 2020 12:09:12 +0000 Received: by outflank-mailman (input) for mailman id 2005; Fri, 02 Oct 2020 12:09:11 +0000 Received: from us1-rack-iad1.inumbo.com ([172.99.69.81]) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1kOJs6-0007iB-V6 for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Fri, 02 Oct 2020 12:09:11 +0000 Received: from mx2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.220.15]) by us1-rack-iad1.inumbo.com (Halon) with ESMTPS id 065e8ae6-58c7-47e1-bf9d-e337fad4b2f5; Fri, 02 Oct 2020 12:09:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.221.27]) by mx2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id E43CFB453; Fri, 2 Oct 2020 12:09:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from us1-rack-iad1.inumbo.com ([172.99.69.81]) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1kOJs6-0007iB-V6 for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Fri, 02 Oct 2020 12:09:11 +0000 X-Inumbo-ID: 065e8ae6-58c7-47e1-bf9d-e337fad4b2f5 Received: from mx2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.220.15]) by us1-rack-iad1.inumbo.com (Halon) with ESMTPS id 065e8ae6-58c7-47e1-bf9d-e337fad4b2f5; Fri, 02 Oct 2020 12:09:09 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.com; s=susede1; t=1601640549; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=eWzi5sBq03i78dd13VMcr/YCIEfgD99M/BA7lsnrOy4=; b=AEQuF+O/8NhXCph2hbwxHL226XTk1wSAz3BDTwA2FoaNVdcfWUy8slItD0NX9s8i3nc54d gWs725DMP0j+TzK+Dp+nLzAh/tcQ4qjedQV1NGEyaXM3zoRIDfhHKYmXHA+I2JYv5/hwAX LK1xfCxzWHhxQ7DMAho7Ks8/OZUWL+E= Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.221.27]) by mx2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id E43CFB453; Fri, 2 Oct 2020 12:09:08 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/hvm: Correct error message in check_segment() To: Andrew Cooper Cc: Xen-devel , =?UTF-8?Q?Roger_Pau_Monn=c3=a9?= , Wei Liu References: <20201002113012.29932-1-andrew.cooper3@citrix.com> From: Jan Beulich Message-ID: <986e7bdf-1ba3-3f6f-fdfb-e8ab23afbc6f@suse.com> Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2020 14:09:10 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.12.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20201002113012.29932-1-andrew.cooper3@citrix.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 02.10.2020 13:30, Andrew Cooper wrote: > The error message is wrong (given AMD's older interpretation of what a NUL > segment should contain, attribute wise), and actively unhelpful because you > only get it in response to a hypercall where the one piece of information you > cannot provide is the segment selector. > > Fix the message to talk about segment attributes, rather than the selector. > > Signed-off-by: Andrew Cooper Acked-by: Jan Beulich albeit ... > --- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/domain.c > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/domain.c > @@ -39,7 +39,7 @@ static int check_segment(struct segment_register *reg, enum x86_segment seg) > { > if ( seg != x86_seg_ds && seg != x86_seg_es ) > { > - gprintk(XENLOG_ERR, "Null selector provided for CS, SS or TR\n"); > + gprintk(XENLOG_ERR, "Empty segment attributes for CS, SS or TR\n"); ... may I suggest "Null" or "Zero" instead of "Empty"? Jan