On 08/04/16 22:03, Bread Cutter wrote:
> My workaround for now is just something like
>
> int mode = hvm_guest_x86_mode(curr);
>
> uint32_t eax = regs->eax;
>
>
> +if(eax == 0xFACE) {
> +hvm_event_guest_request();
> +return 1;
> +}
> +
>
> switch ( mode
My workaround for now is just something like
int mode = hvm_guest_x86_mode(curr);
uint32_t eax = regs->eax;
+if(eax == 0xFACE) {
+hvm_event_guest_request();
+return 1;
+}
+
switch ( mode )
{
case 8:
This way I don't have to worry about if it's
>>> On 04.08.16 at 11:32, wrote:
> On 04/08/16 08:23, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 03.08.16 at 23:00, wrote:
>>> On 08/03/16 23:44, Andrew Cooper wrote:
--- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c
+++ b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c
@@ -5194,8
>>> On 04.08.16 at 11:24, wrote:
> On 04/08/16 08:13, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 03.08.16 at 22:44, wrote:
>>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c
>>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c
>>> @@ -5194,8 +5194,14 @@ int hvm_do_hypercall(struct cpu_user_regs
On 04/08/16 08:23, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 03.08.16 at 23:00, wrote:
>> On 08/03/16 23:44, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c
>>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c
>>> @@ -5194,8 +5194,14 @@ int hvm_do_hypercall(struct cpu_user_regs *regs)
>>>
On 04/08/16 08:13, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 03.08.16 at 22:44, wrote:
>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c
>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c
>> @@ -5194,8 +5194,14 @@ int hvm_do_hypercall(struct cpu_user_regs *regs)
>> switch ( mode )
>> {
>> case 8:
>>
>>> On 03.08.16 at 23:00, wrote:
> On 08/03/16 23:44, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c
>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c
>> @@ -5194,8 +5194,14 @@ int hvm_do_hypercall(struct cpu_user_regs *regs)
>> switch ( mode )
>> {
>> case 8:
>>> On 03.08.16 at 22:44, wrote:
> --- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/hvm.c
> @@ -5194,8 +5194,14 @@ int hvm_do_hypercall(struct cpu_user_regs *regs)
> switch ( mode )
> {
> case 8:
> +if ( eax == __HYPERVISOR_hvm_op &&
>
On 03/08/2016 22:00, Razvan Cojocaru wrote:
> On 08/03/16 23:44, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>> On 03/08/2016 21:37, Bread Cutter wrote:
>>> Hello all,
>>>
>>> I'm writing an executable that runs inside of a guest, and I planned
>>> to use vmcall to talk to a tool running in Dom0, using the vm_event
>>>
On 08/03/16 23:44, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 03/08/2016 21:37, Bread Cutter wrote:
>> Hello all,
>>
>> I'm writing an executable that runs inside of a guest, and I planned
>> to use vmcall to talk to a tool running in Dom0, using the vm_event
>> API. It didn't work, and looking through the code,
On 03/08/2016 21:37, Bread Cutter wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> I'm writing an executable that runs inside of a guest, and I planned
> to use vmcall to talk to a tool running in Dom0, using the vm_event
> API. It didn't work, and looking through the code, the first thing
> hvm_do_hypercall() does is
Hello all,
I'm writing an executable that runs inside of a guest, and I planned
to use vmcall to talk to a tool running in Dom0, using the vm_event
API. It didn't work, and looking through the code, the first thing
hvm_do_hypercall() does is check if the guest is in ring0. If not, it
returns
12 matches
Mail list logo