Re: [PATCH] slow_map: minor improvements to ROM BAR handling

[Alexander Graf <agraf@suse.de>]

Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 12/22/2009 05:41 PM, Alexander Graf wrote:
>>
>>> We could certainly extend emulate.c to fetch instruction bytes from
>>> userspace.  It uses ->read_std() now, so we'd need to switch to
>>> ->read_emulated() and add appropriate buffering.
>>>      
>> I thought the policy on emulate.c was to not have a full instruction
>> emulator but only emulate instructions that do PT modifications or MMIO
>> access?
>>    
>
> It's not a policy, just laziness.  With emulate_invalid_guest_state=1
> we need many more instructions.  Of course I don't want to add
> instructions just for the sake of it, since they will be untested.
>
> I'd much prefer not to run from mmio if possible - just pointing out
> it's doable.

Right...

>> emulator is _really_ small. It only does a few MMU specific
>> instructions, a couple of privileged ones and MMIO accessing ones.
>>    
> Btw, we're in the same situation with PowerPC here. The instruction
>
> Plus, you have a fixed length instruction length, likely more regular
> too.  I imagine powerpc is load/store, so you don't have to emulate a
> zillion ALU instructions?

Well, it's certainly doable (and easier than on x86). But I'm on the
same position as you on the x86 side. Why increase the emulator size at
least 10 times if we don't have to?

Either way, people will report bugs when / if they actually start
executing code off MMIO. So let's not care too much about it for now.
Just make sure the read-only check is in.

Alex