On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 01:47:56AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 27.09.16 at 19:43, wrote:
> > Finally found the vmfunc opcode page in Vol 3 30.3, VMX Instruction
> > Reference.
> > Agreed, there's no mention of prefixes, "pfx", on this page. It appears
> > that the
>>> On 27.09.16 at 19:43, wrote:
> Finally found the vmfunc opcode page in Vol 3 30.3, VMX Instruction Reference.
> Agreed, there's no mention of prefixes, "pfx", on this page. It appears
> that the other VMX instructions in this section don't mention prefixes either.
>
On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 02:26:00AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 26.09.16 at 20:13, wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 10:22:32AM -0700, Lai, Paul wrote:
> >> On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 02:39:58AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >> > >>> On 21.09.16 at 00:35,
>>> On 26.09.16 at 20:13, wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 10:22:32AM -0700, Lai, Paul wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 02:39:58AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> > >>> On 21.09.16 at 00:35, wrote:
>> > > On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 09:50:15AM -0600, Jan
On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 10:22:32AM -0700, Lai, Paul wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 02:39:58AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > >>> On 21.09.16 at 00:35, wrote:
> > > On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 09:50:15AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Paul, there's been no reply to
> >
On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 02:39:58AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 21.09.16 at 00:35, wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 09:50:15AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>
> >> Paul, there's been no reply to
> >>
>>> On 21.09.16 at 00:35, wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 09:50:15AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>
>> Paul, there's been no reply to
>> https://lists.xenproject.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2016-09/msg00380.html
>
> The refered to patch, commit a1b1572833, adds a check for
On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 09:50:15AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
>
> Paul, there's been no reply to
> https://lists.xenproject.org/archives/html/xen-devel/2016-09/msg00380.html
>
> Jan
>
Jan:
The refered to patch, commit a1b1572833, adds a check for vmfunc.
I look a little time to look at the SDM
>>> On 05.09.16 at 11:52, wrote:
> On 05/09/16 10:13, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> LOCK prefixes get dealt with elsewhere and 66, F2, and F3 can all be
>> checked for in one go by looking at vex.pfx.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich
>
> As far as subsuming
On 05/09/16 10:13, Jan Beulich wrote:
> LOCK prefixes get dealt with elsewhere and 66, F2, and F3 can all be
> checked for in one go by looking at vex.pfx.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich
As far as subsuming the checks goes, this is fine. However, is the code
actually correct?
LOCK prefixes get dealt with elsewhere and 66, F2, and F3 can all be
checked for in one go by looking at vex.pfx.
Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich
--- a/xen/arch/x86/x86_emulate/x86_emulate.c
+++ b/xen/arch/x86/x86_emulate/x86_emulate.c
@@ -3942,8 +3942,8 @@ x86_emulate(
11 matches
Mail list logo