ASpace should allow spaces with size 1 #1020
Open
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
There was a test that explicitly rejected this, but because ASpace is exclusive it's actually fine for `start == end`. Adjust the test to use such a one-wide address space instead; it worked fine the whole time.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a test that explicitly rejected this, but because ASpace is exclusive it's actually fine for
start == end. Adjust the test to use such a one-wide address space instead; it worked fine the whole time.This (should?) fix #1019.
@dancrossnyc theoretically from my analysis in #1019 I believe any access to a VirtIO ISR should have immediately panic'd propolis, but I know we've both seen NICs work before and after landing #998. Do the two observations of "typically working Propolis" and "lazy-static initializer const-eval' to panic()" make sense to you? In particular, does it seem possible that a guest wouldn't touch this register except in some odd circumstance? The alternative to me seems like a guest OS/driver that we missed in testing which does touch this register when others don't?