From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Keir Fraser <keir@xensource.com>
Subject: Re: VMX check_for_null_selector()
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2006 09:47:37 +0000
Message-ID: <C189CD39.4DD3%keir@xensource.com>
References: <45641C8F.76E4.0078.0@novell.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com>
In-Reply-To: <45641C8F.76E4.0078.0@novell.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com
To: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@novell.com>, xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

Good question, it's something I've been meaning to ask the Intel guys
about...

 K.

On 22/11/06 08:46, "Jan Beulich" <jbeulich@novell.com> wrote:

> What is the hidden background for using this function when the guest
> is in protected mode? When the selector used is a null one (and not
> in 64-bit mode), the instruction should not cause an
> EXIT_REASON_IO_INSTRUCTION exit at all, but rather should cause
> a GP fault in the guest. In 64-bit mode, a null selector isn't invalid,
> and hence doesn't need checking for.
> What I'm trying to determine is whether the function must be fixed
> (to deal with (a) non-zero CS base addresses and (b) the fact that
> on INS there shouldn't be checking for segment overrides, but ES
> should be used in all cases) or can be removed.
> 
> Thanks, Jan
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-devel mailing list
> Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
> http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel