[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v3 07/32] xen/x86: fix arch_set_info_guest for HVM guests
>>> On 24.07.15 at 14:11, <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > El 24/07/15 a les 12.46, Jan Beulich ha escrit: >>>>> On 24.07.15 at 11:59, <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> __DECL_GP_REG(flags); >> >> r8-r11, selector and descriptor registers, pseudo descriptor registers. >> Or else for all of them their default state would need to be spelled out. > > r8-r15 right? Oh - of course. >>> /* Control registers. */ >>> uint64_t cr[8]; >>> /* Valid on amd64 only. */ >> >> Fields valid/useful in one mode only should probably be put in >> union-ized sub-structures. > > Do you mean something like: > > union { > uint64_t efer; > uint32_t __invalid32; > uint16_t __invalid16; > } > > It seems kind of pointless IMHO, the reason to have the union is to be > able to access the registers using the native nomenclature, but if a > register doesn't exist in a specific bitness I don't see the point of > adding such "invalid" names. No - put side by side an item valid in only a subset modes and an item only valid outside of that subset. > Or your idea was to put all the bitness specific registers inside of > another separate structure and then unionize them? AFAICT the 16 and > 32bit structures are going to be empty. How that? 64-bit mode e.g. doesn't need full descriptor data for many of the segment registers. Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |