@@ -908,16 +908,14 @@ static void do_inject_x86_mce(CPUState *cs, run_on_cpu_data data)
return;
}
- if (recursive) {
- need_reset = true;
- msg = g_strdup_printf("CPU %d: Previous MCE still in progress, "
- "raising triple fault", cs->cpu_index);
- }
-
if (!(cenv->cr[4] & CR4_MCE_MASK)) {
need_reset = true;
msg = g_strdup_printf("CPU %d: MCE capability is not enabled, "
"raising triple fault", cs->cpu_index);
+ } else if (recursive) {
+ need_reset = true;
+ msg = g_strdup_printf("CPU %d: Previous MCE still in progress, "
+ "raising triple fault", cs->cpu_index);
}
if (need_reset) {
g_strdup_printf is used twice to write to the same variable, which can theoretically cause a leak. In practice, it is extremely unlikely that a guest is seeing a recursive MCE and has disabled CR4.MCE between the first and the second error, but we can fix it and we can also make a slight improvement on the logic: CR4.MCE=0 causes a triple fault even for a non-recursive machine check, so let's place its test first. Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> --- target/i386/helper.c | 10 ++++------ 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)