On Fri, Apr 19, 2024 at 8:13 AM Tom Lendacky <thomas.lenda...@amd.com> wrote: > > On 4/17/24 11:54, Adam Dunlap wrote: > > + > > + case SVM_EXIT_INVD: > > + break; > > This changes the current behavior today, but I'm ok with that. >
Whoops, I should've checked that. Should we delete InvdExit() then, if it's dead code? > > + > > + case SVM_EXIT_MONITOR: > > + CcDecodeModRm (Regs, InstructionData); > > + > > + if ((OpCode == 0x01) && (InstructionData->ModRm.Uint8 == 0xc8)) { > > This should also handle the MONITORX opcode (hmmm... I need to send a > patch to the kernel). > > > + return 0; > > + } > > + > > + break; > > + > > + case SVM_EXIT_MWAIT: > > + CcDecodeModRm (Regs, InstructionData); > > + > > + if ((OpCode == 0x01) && (InstructionData->ModRm.Uint8 == 0xc9)) { > > Same here for MWAITX. > > Thanks, > Tom Got it! I'll send out a new patch shortly if I can figure out how to use git send-email correctly. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#118037): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/118037 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/105581633/21656 Mute #vc:https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/mutehashtag/vc Group Owner: devel+ow...@edk2.groups.io Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-