Re: [Xen-devel] [Patch] x86emul: simplify prefix handling for VMFUNC

2016-09-30 Thread Lai, Paul
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

Re: [Xen-devel] [Patch] x86emul: simplify prefix handling for VMFUNC

2016-09-28 Thread Jan Beulich
>>> 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. >

Re: [Xen-devel] [Patch] x86emul: simplify prefix handling for VMFUNC

2016-09-27 Thread Lai, Paul
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,

Re: [Xen-devel] [Patch] x86emul: simplify prefix handling for VMFUNC

2016-09-27 Thread Jan Beulich
>>> 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

Re: [Xen-devel] [Patch] x86emul: simplify prefix handling for VMFUNC

2016-09-26 Thread Lai, Paul
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 > >

Re: [Xen-devel] [Patch] x86emul: simplify prefix handling for VMFUNC

2016-09-21 Thread Lai, Paul
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 > >>

Re: [Xen-devel] [Patch] x86emul: simplify prefix handling for VMFUNC

2016-09-21 Thread Jan Beulich
>>> 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

Re: [Xen-devel] [Patch] x86emul: simplify prefix handling for VMFUNC

2016-09-20 Thread Lai, Paul
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

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] x86emul: simplify prefix handling for VMFUNC

2016-09-05 Thread Jan Beulich
>>> 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

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] x86emul: simplify prefix handling for VMFUNC

2016-09-05 Thread Andrew Cooper
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?

[Xen-devel] [PATCH] x86emul: simplify prefix handling for VMFUNC

2016-09-05 Thread Jan Beulich
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(