From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Gleb Natapov Subject: Re: [PATCH 13/15] Add NMI injection support to SVM. Date: Sun, 19 Apr 2009 16:51:07 +0300 Message-ID: <20090419135107.GA19899@redhat.com> References: <1239616545-25199-1-git-send-email-gleb@redhat.com> <1239616545-25199-14-git-send-email-gleb@redhat.com> <49E8DEC1.4030802@web.de> <20090419131735.GG10126@redhat.com> <49EB2559.4000704@redhat.com> <20090419132434.GH10126@redhat.com> <49EB26E9.4060002@redhat.com> <20090419134005.GL10126@redhat.com> <49EB2A8D.603@web.de> <49EB2BDE.10206@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Jan Kiszka , kvm@vger.kernel.org, joerg.roedel@amd.com, sheng@linux.intel.com, Dmitry Baryshkov To: Avi Kivity Return-path: Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:35228 "EHLO mx2.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755001AbZDSNvN (ORCPT ); Sun, 19 Apr 2009 09:51:13 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <49EB2BDE.10206@redhat.com> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 04:49:18PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote: > Jan Kiszka wrote: >> We already spent to much electrons and brain cycles on possibly "much >> simpler" workarounds. I think injecting and handling a single-step, even >> while there is guest debugging going on or the guest itself single-steps >> or both, will not be more complicated - but "more correct". >> > > I agree. I'm still worried about interactions between the IRET single > stepping code and other things which use the debug registers. > I don't disagree too. Just throwing other ideas :) -- Gleb.