From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Don Slutz <dslutz@verizon.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH for-4.5 v8 4/7] xen: Add vmware_port support
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 15:19:45 -0500
Message-ID: <54C6A161.2010002@terremark.com>
References: <1412285417-19180-1-git-send-email-dslutz@verizon.com>
	<1412285417-19180-5-git-send-email-dslutz@verizon.com>
	<542DCA92.1030701@terremark.com> <542DD44F.6030101@terremark.com>
	<54B8F1740200007800055B42@mail.emea.novell.com>
	<54BFE768.3090309@terremark.com>
	<54C0C39F0200007800057F73@mail.emea.novell.com>
	<54C6643B.1@terremark.com>
	<54C67D8302000078000598E4@mail.emea.novell.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
In-Reply-To: <54C67D8302000078000598E4@mail.emea.novell.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>, Don Slutz <dslutz@verizon.com>
Cc: Jun Nakajima <jun.nakajima@intel.com>, Tim Deegan <tim@xen.org>, Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@intel.com>, Keir Fraser <keir@xen.org>, Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>, Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>, George Dunlap <George.Dunlap@eu.citrix.com>, Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>, Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com>, xen-devel@lists.xen.org, Eddie Dong <eddie.dong@intel.com>, Suravee Suthikulpanit <suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com>, Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On 01/26/15 11:46, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 26.01.15 at 16:58, <dslutz@verizon.com> wrote:
>> On 01/22/15 03:32, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>>> On 21.01.15 at 18:52, <dslutz@verizon.com> wrote:
>>>> On 01/16/15 05:09, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 03.10.14 at 00:40, <dslutz@verizon.com> wrote:

...

> 
> As stated before - if feasible, 8 would seem the best option. The
> second best one would be to support all four I/O insns (assuming
> VMware supports all of them too) with any legal (even if pointless
> or redundant) prefix combination, and with the prefixes actually
> doing something correctly emulated.
> 

Ok, I will focus on hvm_emulate_one.


>>>> So there are 3 options here:
>>>> 1) Add an ASSERT() like the BUG_ON() in get_instruction_length()
>>>> 2) Switch to using get_instruction_length()
>>>> 3) Switch to using MAX_INST_LEN.
>>>>
>>>> Let me know which way to go.
>>> As said above - use get_instruction_length() if Intel confirms the
>>> necessary hardware behavior as being architectural. If they
>>> don't, 3) looks like the only viable option.
>>
>>
>> So what is the procedure to getting "Intel confirms the necessary hardware
>> behaviour as being architectural"?
> 
> There's no procedure. Ask them explicitly (i.e. perhaps outside of
> this thread, where the question may end up being well hidden from
> their eyes), and then ping them until they give you a statement one
> way or another.
> 

I am assuming that:

INTEL(R) VT FOR X86 (VT-X)
M:      Jun Nakajima <jun.nakajima@intel.com>
M:      Eddie Dong <eddie.dong@intel.com>
M:      Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@intel.com>

Is to correct list of people to ask.

   -Don Slutz


> Jan
>