From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Keir Fraser Subject: Re: Re: issues with movnti emulation Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2008 17:43:08 +0000 Message-ID: References: <20081120171641.GJ25331@york.uk.xensource.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20081120171641.GJ25331@york.uk.xensource.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Tim Deegan Cc: xen-devel@lists.xensource.com List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 20/11/08 17:16, "Tim Deegan" wrote: > At 17:13 +0000 on 20 Nov (1227201181), Keir Fraser wrote: >> I think the issue is that I did a bad backport to 3.3. The 'case 0xc3' >> should be under twobyte_special_insn rather than twobyte_insn, right? The >> two separate paths got merged into one in xen-unstable. >> >> Of course this data corruption ought only to happen in cases where we'd >> previously have failed an mmio emulation (and hence probably killed the >> guest kernel?). > > A more likely culprit is that some OSes use movnti to zero pages that > used to be pagetables; when we couldn't emulate it we just (correctly) > unshadowed those pages. Yes, you're probably right. I wonder if we are relying on emulation failures to inform unshadowing at all often? We might have to revisit constraining x86_emulate() when called by shadow code, do you think? -- Keir