From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Razvan Cojocaru <rcojocaru@bitdefender.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] xen/vm_event: Added support for XSETBV
 events
Date: Fri, 08 May 2015 15:09:34 +0300
Message-ID: <554CA77E.8060501@bitdefender.com>
References: <1430932352-4289-1-git-send-email-rcojocaru@bitdefender.com>	<1430932352-4289-2-git-send-email-rcojocaru@bitdefender.com>	<554BA904.2020501@citrix.com>
	<554C7C91.9040208@bitdefender.com>	<554C7DA2.50601@citrix.com>	<CAErYnsh=N9AvoKFUN+i2oyF_fyQhGY2u4wO=v6y7hXP-thXi+g@mail.gmail.com>	<554C9606.7070103@citrix.com>	<CAErYnsiY-YsViBCVeki6xj7GkuU37rp-qmzCb7R_ncVtAQN-jg@mail.gmail.com>
	<554CBFA60200007800078360@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: <554CBFA60200007800078360@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>, Tamas K Lengyel <tamas.lengyel@zentific.com>
Cc: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>, "xen-devel@lists.xen.org" <xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On 05/08/2015 02:52 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 08.05.15 at 13:05, <tamas.lengyel@zentific.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, May 8, 2015 at 12:55 PM, Andrew Cooper
>> <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com> wrote:
>>> On 08/05/15 11:53, Tamas K Lengyel wrote:
>>>> On Fri, May 8, 2015 at 11:10 AM, Andrew Cooper
>>>> <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 08/05/15 10:06, Razvan Cojocaru wrote:
>>>>>> On 05/07/2015 09:03 PM, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>>>>>>> In an effort to be architecture neutral, it might be an idea to have
>>>>>>> something like
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> struct vm_event_write_cr {
>>>>>>>     uint64_t index;
>>>>>>>     uint64_t old_val, new_val;
>>>>>>> };
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And have a per-arch index of control registers, such as
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> X86_CR0
>>>>>>> X86_CR3
>>>>>>> X86_CR4
>>>>>>> X86_XCR0
>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>> ARM32_$foo
>>>> On ARM there are no "cr" registers so IMHO it would be better to
>>>> rename the struct vm_event_write_register. Other than that this sounds
>>>> like a good addition to the interface.
>>>
>>> But there are surely the concept of "control registers" ?
>>>
>>> (I have no knowledge in this area)
>>>
>>> ~Andrew
>>
>> (Re-adding xen-devel)
>>
>> Certainly, they are just not (necessarily) called "CR". For example,
>> CR3 equivalent on ARM is TTBR1. So what I meant here is that naming
>> the struct should not be x86 specific.
> 
> In which case - vm_event_write_ctrlreg?

Looks good. Of course, the underlying footwork will need to stay just as
complicated - sync / enabled flags for each supported register, but the
interface will be cleaner and there will be less repetition for
xc_monitor_*() and hvm_event_*().


Thanks,
Razvan