On 16/10/26 07:43, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
On 15/10/26 23:32, Pierrick Bouvier wrote:
For now, we keep the global cpu_get_dump_info symbol defined.
Signed-off-by: Pierrick Bouvier <[email protected]>
---
target/i386/arch_dump.c | 17 ++++++++++++++---
target/i386/cpu-internal.h | 5 +++++
target/i386/cpu.c | 1 +
3 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
-int cpu_get_dump_info(ArchDumpInfo *info,
+int x86_get_dump_info(const CPUState *cs, ArchDumpInfo *info,
const GuestPhysBlockList *guest_phys_blocks)
{
bool lma = false;
GuestPhysBlock *block;
#ifdef TARGET_X86_64
- X86CPU *first_x86_cpu = X86_CPU(first_cpu);
- lma = first_cpu && (first_x86_cpu->env.hflags & HF_LMA_MASK);
I know this is pre-existing, but I'd like to understand this check, ...
+ const X86CPU *cpu = X86_CPU(cs);
+ lma = !!(cpu->env.hflags & HF_LMA_MASK);
#endif
if (lma) {
@@ -429,6 +430,16 @@ int cpu_get_dump_info(ArchDumpInfo *info,
return 0;
}
+int cpu_get_dump_info(ArchDumpInfo *info,
+ const GuestPhysBlockList *guest_phys_blocks)
+{
+ if (first_cpu == NULL) {
... because you kept it. Why do we need it? QTest something?
(goal is to understand when this can be called on a non-vCPU thread)
Apparently s390x doesn't seem annoyed enough to check for NULL
first_cpu, but maybe that code was never exercised there.
+ return -1;
+ }
+
+ return x86_get_dump_info(first_cpu, info, guest_phys_blocks);
+}
