On 9/5/2026 6:34 AM, Jim Mattson wrote:
+static u64 get_intercept_linear_addr(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt, + enum x86_intercept intercept) +{ + u64 la; + + if (intercept != x86_intercept_invlpg) + return 0; + + la = seg_base(ctxt, ctxt->src.addr.mem.seg) + ctxt->src.addr.mem.ea; + return ctxt->mode == X86EMUL_MODE_PROT64 ? la : (u32)la; +}The linear address calculation here is replicated from __linearize(). Perhaps something like: static u64 get_invlpg_linear_addr(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt) { unsigned int max_size; ulong linear; if (intercept != x86_intercept_invlpg) return 0; __linearize(ctxt, ctxt->src.addr.mem, &max_size, 1, ctxt->mode, &linear, X86EMUL_F_INVLPG); return linear; }
I initially used the minimal calculation needed for EXITINFO1 because I thought some of the additional processing in __linearize() was unnecessary when reporting the linear address to L1. However, reusing __linearize() keeps the intercepted path consistent with em_invlpg(). I will switch to __linearize() with X86EMUL_F_INVLPG.
static int emulator_check_intercept(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt, enum x86_intercept intercept, enum x86_intercept_stage stage) @@ -427,6 +447,7 @@ static int emulator_check_intercept(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt, .src_type = ctxt->src.type, .dst_type = ctxt->dst.type, .ad_bytes = ctxt->ad_bytes, + .intercept_linear_addr = get_intercept_linear_addr(ctxt, intercept),Maybe: + .invlpg_linear_addr = get_invlpg_linear_addr(ctxt, intercept),
Yes, this is clearer. Thanks, Tina
