Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 18/18] PVH xen: introduce vmx_pvh.c

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 09.07.13 at 02:01, Mukesh Rathor <mukesh.rathor@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, 8 Jul 2013 16:09:55 -0700
> Mukesh Rathor <mukesh.rathor@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
>> On Mon, 08 Jul 2013 09:31:17 +0100
>> "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> 
>> > >>> On 06.07.13 at 03:31, Mukesh Rathor <mukesh.rathor@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> > >>> wrote:
>> > > Ok, lmk if you are ok with following:
>> > 
>> > Fundamentally yes. But ...
>> > 
>> > > --- a/xen/arch/x86/Makefile
>> > > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/Makefile
>> > > @@ -41,6 +41,7 @@ obj-y += numa.o
>> > >  obj-y += pci.o
>> > >  obj-y += percpu.o
>> > >  obj-y += physdev.o
>> > > +obj-y += pvh.o
>> > 
>> > Does this indeed warrant a separate file?
>> 
>> yeah, i wasn't sure about that, but was not sure where to put it. I
>> think we could just have hvm_kernel_mode() next to
>> hvm_get_segment_register in hvm.h. It can then also be used in HVM
>> code in various places where it currently checks for dpl/cpl.
> 
> Actually, not feasible to put anything in any header since regs.h is a 
> pretty
> early-on header include, and can't include any other headers. So:

Fine with me, except (as said before) ...

> --- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c
> @@ -4642,6 +4642,14 @@ enum hvm_intblk nhvm_interrupt_blocked(struct vcpu *v)
>      return hvm_funcs.nhvm_intr_blocked(v);
>  }
>  
> +bool_t hvm_kernel_mode(const struct vcpu *v)
> +{
> +    struct segment_register seg;
> +
> +    hvm_get_segment_register((struct vcpu *)v, x86_seg_ss, &seg);

.. for this cast.

Jan

> +    return (seg.attr.fields.dpl == 0);
> +}
> +



_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel