> On Jul 26, 2017, at 2:43 PM, Juergen Gross wrote:
>
>> On 26/07/17 19:57, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>>
>>
On Jul 26, 2017, at 11:50 AM, Juergen Gross wrote:
> On 26/07/17 15:48, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 7:28 AM,
> On Jul 26, 2017, at 2:43 PM, Juergen Gross wrote:
>
>> On 26/07/17 19:57, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>>
>>
On Jul 26, 2017, at 11:50 AM, Juergen Gross wrote:
> On 26/07/17 15:48, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 7:28 AM, Juergen Gross wrote:
> When
On 26/07/17 19:57, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>
>
>> On Jul 26, 2017, at 11:50 AM, Juergen Gross wrote:
>>
>>> On 26/07/17 15:48, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 7:28 AM, Juergen Gross wrote:
When running as Xen pv-guest the exception
On 26/07/17 19:57, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>
>
>> On Jul 26, 2017, at 11:50 AM, Juergen Gross wrote:
>>
>>> On 26/07/17 15:48, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 7:28 AM, Juergen Gross wrote:
When running as Xen pv-guest the exception frame on the stack contains
%r11
> On Jul 26, 2017, at 11:50 AM, Juergen Gross wrote:
>
>> On 26/07/17 15:48, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 7:28 AM, Juergen Gross wrote:
>>> When running as Xen pv-guest the exception frame on the stack contains
>>> %r11 and %rcx
> On Jul 26, 2017, at 11:50 AM, Juergen Gross wrote:
>
>> On 26/07/17 15:48, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 7:28 AM, Juergen Gross wrote:
>>> When running as Xen pv-guest the exception frame on the stack contains
>>> %r11 and %rcx additional to the other data pushed by the
On 26/07/17 15:48, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 7:28 AM, Juergen Gross wrote:
>> When running as Xen pv-guest the exception frame on the stack contains
>> %r11 and %rcx additional to the other data pushed by the processor.
>>
>> Instead of having a paravirt op
On 26/07/17 15:48, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 7:28 AM, Juergen Gross wrote:
>> When running as Xen pv-guest the exception frame on the stack contains
>> %r11 and %rcx additional to the other data pushed by the processor.
>>
>> Instead of having a paravirt op being called for
On 26/07/17 15:48, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 7:28 AM, Juergen Gross wrote:
>> When running as Xen pv-guest the exception frame on the stack contains
>> %r11 and %rcx additional to the other data pushed by the processor.
>>
>> Instead of having a paravirt op
On 26/07/17 15:48, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 7:28 AM, Juergen Gross wrote:
>> When running as Xen pv-guest the exception frame on the stack contains
>> %r11 and %rcx additional to the other data pushed by the processor.
>>
>> Instead of having a paravirt op being called for
On 26/07/17 15:09, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 7:01 AM, Andrew Cooper
> wrote:
>> On 26/07/17 14:48, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
/* Runs on exception stack */
-ENTRY(nmi)
- /*
-* Fix up the exception frame if we're on
On 26/07/17 15:09, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 7:01 AM, Andrew Cooper
> wrote:
>> On 26/07/17 14:48, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
/* Runs on exception stack */
-ENTRY(nmi)
- /*
-* Fix up the exception frame if we're on Xen.
-*
On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 7:01 AM, Andrew Cooper
wrote:
> On 26/07/17 14:48, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>>
>>> /* Runs on exception stack */
>>> -ENTRY(nmi)
>>> - /*
>>> -* Fix up the exception frame if we're on Xen.
>>> -*
On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 7:01 AM, Andrew Cooper
wrote:
> On 26/07/17 14:48, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>>
>>> /* Runs on exception stack */
>>> -ENTRY(nmi)
>>> - /*
>>> -* Fix up the exception frame if we're on Xen.
>>> -* PARAVIRT_ADJUST_EXCEPTION_FRAME is guaranteed to push at
On 26/07/17 14:48, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>
>> /* Runs on exception stack */
>> -ENTRY(nmi)
>> - /*
>> -* Fix up the exception frame if we're on Xen.
>> -* PARAVIRT_ADJUST_EXCEPTION_FRAME is guaranteed to push at most
>> -* one value to the stack on native, so it may
On 26/07/17 14:48, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>
>> /* Runs on exception stack */
>> -ENTRY(nmi)
>> - /*
>> -* Fix up the exception frame if we're on Xen.
>> -* PARAVIRT_ADJUST_EXCEPTION_FRAME is guaranteed to push at most
>> -* one value to the stack on native, so it may
On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 7:28 AM, Juergen Gross wrote:
> When running as Xen pv-guest the exception frame on the stack contains
> %r11 and %rcx additional to the other data pushed by the processor.
>
> Instead of having a paravirt op being called for each exception type
> prepend
On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 7:28 AM, Juergen Gross wrote:
> When running as Xen pv-guest the exception frame on the stack contains
> %r11 and %rcx additional to the other data pushed by the processor.
>
> Instead of having a paravirt op being called for each exception type
> prepend the Xen specific
On 7/24/2017 10:28 AM, Juergen Gross wrote:
When running as Xen pv-guest the exception frame on the stack contains
%r11 and %rcx additional to the other data pushed by the processor.
Instead of having a paravirt op being called for each exception type
prepend the Xen specific code to each
On 7/24/2017 10:28 AM, Juergen Gross wrote:
When running as Xen pv-guest the exception frame on the stack contains
%r11 and %rcx additional to the other data pushed by the processor.
Instead of having a paravirt op being called for each exception type
prepend the Xen specific code to each
When running as Xen pv-guest the exception frame on the stack contains
%r11 and %rcx additional to the other data pushed by the processor.
Instead of having a paravirt op being called for each exception type
prepend the Xen specific code to each exception entry. When running as
Xen pv-guest just
When running as Xen pv-guest the exception frame on the stack contains
%r11 and %rcx additional to the other data pushed by the processor.
Instead of having a paravirt op being called for each exception type
prepend the Xen specific code to each exception entry. When running as
Xen pv-guest just
22 matches
Mail list logo