>>> On 22.10.15 at 16:26, <andrew.coop...@citrix.com> wrote: > On 22/10/15 15:20, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>>> On 20.10.15 at 10:21, <shuai.r...@linux.intel.com> wrote: >>> @@ -4784,6 +4804,13 @@ int hvm_msr_write_intercept(unsigned int msr, >>> uint64_t > msr_content, >>> return X86EMUL_EXCEPTION; >>> break; >>> >>> + case MSR_IA32_XSS: >>> + /* No XSS features currently supported for guests. */ >>> + if ( !cpu_has_xsaves || msr_content != 0 ) >>> + goto gp_fault; >>> + v->arch.hvm_vcpu.msr_xss = msr_content; >>> + break; >> Considering you add this write (and the msr_xss field in the first place) >> despite it always being zero, I'd really like you to also add code >> supporting save/restore of this new MSR. Or did I overlook something? > > I suppose that does mean that we don't strictly need > interception/management of MSR_IA32_XSS yet, but it is ground work for > the future work to enable Processor Trace for HVM guests.
Right, that's how I understand it. I simply think that if such ground work is done, it shouldn't stop half ways. Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
