|
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH RFC V7 1/5] xen: Emulate with no writes
>>> On 13.08.14 at 17:28, <rcojocaru@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> +void hvm_emulate_one_full(bool_t nowrite, unsigned int trapnr,
> + unsigned int errcode)
> +{
> + struct hvm_emulate_ctxt ctx = {{ 0 }};
> + int rc;
> +
> + hvm_emulate_prepare(&ctx, guest_cpu_user_regs());
> +
> + if ( nowrite )
> + rc = hvm_emulate_one_no_write(&ctx);
> + else
> + rc = hvm_emulate_one(&ctx);
> +
> + switch ( rc )
> + {
> + case X86EMUL_UNHANDLEABLE:
> + gdprintk(XENLOG_DEBUG, "Emulation failed @ %04x:%lx: "
> + "%02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x %02x\n",
> + hvmemul_get_seg_reg(x86_seg_cs, &ctx)->sel,
> + ctx.insn_buf_eip,
> + ctx.insn_buf[0], ctx.insn_buf[1],
> + ctx.insn_buf[2], ctx.insn_buf[3],
> + ctx.insn_buf[4], ctx.insn_buf[5],
> + ctx.insn_buf[6], ctx.insn_buf[7],
> + ctx.insn_buf[8], ctx.insn_buf[9]);
> + hvm_inject_hw_exception(trapnr, errcode);
> + break;
> + case X86EMUL_EXCEPTION:
> + if ( ctx.exn_pending )
> + hvm_inject_hw_exception(ctx.exn_vector, ctx.exn_error_code);
> + break;
Shouldn't you act on X86EMUL_RETRY here? Or at least not fall through
to the writeback below?
Jan
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
![]() |
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |