From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrew Cooper Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] SVM: streamline entry.S code Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2013 18:46:40 +0100 Message-ID: <521B9480.6080509@citrix.com> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail6.bemta4.messagelabs.com ([85.158.143.247]) by lists.xen.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1VE0sG-0004kN-9o for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Mon, 26 Aug 2013 17:46:44 +0000 In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org To: Keir Fraser Cc: xen-devel , Boris Ostrovsky , Jacob Shin , suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com, Jan Beulich List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 26/08/2013 18:20, Keir Fraser wrote: > >> However, I cant find anywhere in the code which overwrites regs->rax from >> vmcb->rax, which I would have thought would have thought would cause utter >> devastation in combination with the generic functions working with a >> cpu_user_regs structure. > It's right there in entry.S: 'mov VMCB_rax(%rcx),%rax; mov > %rax,UREGS_rax(%rsp)' So it is. I feel quite silly right about now. I suspect that I have been staring at this code a bit too long. ~Andrew