[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH V8] xen/vm_event: Clean up control-register-write vm_events and add XCR0 event
On Fri, 2015-05-29 at 16:45 +0300, Razvan Cojocaru wrote: > As suggested by Andrew Cooper, this patch attempts to remove > some redundancy and allow for an easier time when adding vm_events > for new control registers in the future, by having a single > VM_EVENT_REASON_WRITE_CTRLREG vm_event type, meant to serve CR0, > CR3, CR4 and (newly introduced) XCR0. The actual control register > will be deduced by the new .index field in vm_event_write_ctrlreg > (renamed from vm_event_mov_to_cr). The patch has also modified > the xen-access.c test - it is now able to log CR3 events. > > Signed-off-by: Razvan Cojocaru <rcojocaru@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Acked-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx> Seems ok from the tools and arm side, so long as the xen-access.c test is likely to build on ARM despite the new x86-isms (it looks like it to me) and the following Q: > +/* Supported values for the vm_event_write_ctrlreg index. */ > +#define VM_EVENT_X86_CR0 0 > +#define VM_EVENT_X86_CR3 1 > +#define VM_EVENT_X86_CR4 2 > +#define VM_EVENT_X86_XCR0 3 Is the intention for different architectures to use non-overlapping number spaces? (i.e. ARM would start from 0x10000 or something)? If not then the usages in xen-access.c are a little more problematic. I can just about tolerate a tool on arm which asks "monitor x86 cr3" and then never sees anything, but to get events for whatever ARM reg happens to share the index instead would be wrong I think. Ian. _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |