* [PATCH 1/2] KVM: x86 emulator: Disable writeback for CMP emulation
@ 2011-03-28 16:32 Takuya Yoshikawa
2011-03-28 16:34 ` [RFC PATCH 2/2] KVM: x86 emulator: Cleanup emulate_push() writebacks Takuya Yoshikawa
2011-04-03 14:42 ` [PATCH 1/2] KVM: x86 emulator: Disable writeback for CMP emulation Avi Kivity
0 siblings, 2 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Takuya Yoshikawa @ 2011-03-28 16:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: avi, mtosatti; +Cc: kvm, yoshikawa.takuya, gleb
From: Takuya Yoshikawa <yoshikawa.takuya@oss.ntt.co.jp>
This stops "CMP r/m, reg" to write back the data into memory.
Pointed out by Avi.
Signed-off-by: Takuya Yoshikawa <yoshikawa.takuya@oss.ntt.co.jp>
---
arch/x86/kvm/emulate.c | 2 ++
1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/emulate.c b/arch/x86/kvm/emulate.c
index 14c5ad5..8a73805 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/emulate.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/emulate.c
@@ -3084,6 +3084,7 @@ special_insn:
emulate_2op_SrcV("xor", c->src, c->dst, ctxt->eflags);
break;
case 0x38 ... 0x3d:
+ c->dst.type = OP_NONE; /* Disable writeback. */
cmp: /* cmp */
emulate_2op_SrcV("cmp", c->src, c->dst, ctxt->eflags);
break;
@@ -3138,6 +3139,7 @@ special_insn:
case 6:
goto xor;
case 7:
+ c->dst.type = OP_NONE; /* Disable writeback. */
goto cmp;
}
break;
--
1.7.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* [RFC PATCH 2/2] KVM: x86 emulator: Cleanup emulate_push() writebacks
2011-03-28 16:32 [PATCH 1/2] KVM: x86 emulator: Disable writeback for CMP emulation Takuya Yoshikawa
@ 2011-03-28 16:34 ` Takuya Yoshikawa
2011-03-30 6:51 ` Takuya Yoshikawa
2011-04-03 14:50 ` Avi Kivity
2011-04-03 14:42 ` [PATCH 1/2] KVM: x86 emulator: Disable writeback for CMP emulation Avi Kivity
1 sibling, 2 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Takuya Yoshikawa @ 2011-03-28 16:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: avi, mtosatti; +Cc: kvm, yoshikawa.takuya, gleb
From: Takuya Yoshikawa <yoshikawa.takuya@oss.ntt.co.jp>
Recently, emulate_push family functions started to call writeback()
during their emulation. This clearly shows that the usual writeback()
which is done at the end of x86_emulate_insn() cannot cover all cases.
Furthermore, suppressing writeback by changing dst operand's type is
not simple when conditional writeback must be taken care of.
This patch improves this situation a bit by making emulate_push()
itself do writeback and removes scattered writebacks from callers.
This is done by splitting the writeback for OP_MEM case out from
writeback() as a new helper function, writeback_to_mem(), and call it
directly from emulate_push().
Signed-off-by: Takuya Yoshikawa <yoshikawa.takuya@oss.ntt.co.jp>
---
arch/x86/kvm/emulate.c | 111 ++++++++++++++++++++---------------------------
1 files changed, 47 insertions(+), 64 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/emulate.c b/arch/x86/kvm/emulate.c
index 8a73805..fe3419a 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/emulate.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/emulate.c
@@ -1069,6 +1069,20 @@ static void write_register_operand(struct operand *op)
}
}
+static int writeback_to_mem(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt,
+ struct x86_emulate_ops *ops,
+ struct decode_cache *c)
+{
+ if (c->lock_prefix)
+ return ops->cmpxchg_emulated(linear(ctxt, c->dst.addr.mem),
+ &c->dst.orig_val, &c->dst.val, c->dst.bytes,
+ &ctxt->exception, ctxt->vcpu);
+ else
+ return ops->write_emulated(linear(ctxt, c->dst.addr.mem),
+ &c->dst.val, c->dst.bytes,
+ &ctxt->exception, ctxt->vcpu);
+}
+
static inline int writeback(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt,
struct x86_emulate_ops *ops)
{
@@ -1080,21 +1094,7 @@ static inline int writeback(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt,
write_register_operand(&c->dst);
break;
case OP_MEM:
- if (c->lock_prefix)
- rc = ops->cmpxchg_emulated(
- linear(ctxt, c->dst.addr.mem),
- &c->dst.orig_val,
- &c->dst.val,
- c->dst.bytes,
- &ctxt->exception,
- ctxt->vcpu);
- else
- rc = ops->write_emulated(
- linear(ctxt, c->dst.addr.mem),
- &c->dst.val,
- c->dst.bytes,
- &ctxt->exception,
- ctxt->vcpu);
+ rc = writeback_to_mem(ctxt, ops, c);
if (rc != X86EMUL_CONTINUE)
return rc;
break;
@@ -1107,17 +1107,21 @@ static inline int writeback(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt,
return X86EMUL_CONTINUE;
}
-static inline void emulate_push(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt,
- struct x86_emulate_ops *ops)
+static inline int emulate_push(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt,
+ struct x86_emulate_ops *ops)
{
struct decode_cache *c = &ctxt->decode;
+ int rc;
- c->dst.type = OP_MEM;
c->dst.bytes = c->op_bytes;
c->dst.val = c->src.val;
register_address_increment(c, &c->regs[VCPU_REGS_RSP], -c->op_bytes);
c->dst.addr.mem.ea = register_address(c, c->regs[VCPU_REGS_RSP]);
c->dst.addr.mem.seg = VCPU_SREG_SS;
+
+ rc = writeback_to_mem(ctxt, ops, c);
+ c->dst.type = OP_NONE;
+ return rc;
}
static int emulate_pop(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt,
@@ -1179,14 +1183,13 @@ static int emulate_popf(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt,
return rc;
}
-static void emulate_push_sreg(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt,
- struct x86_emulate_ops *ops, int seg)
+static int emulate_push_sreg(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt,
+ struct x86_emulate_ops *ops, int seg)
{
struct decode_cache *c = &ctxt->decode;
c->src.val = ops->get_segment_selector(seg, ctxt->vcpu);
-
- emulate_push(ctxt, ops);
+ return emulate_push(ctxt, ops);
}
static int emulate_pop_sreg(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt,
@@ -1216,18 +1219,13 @@ static int emulate_pusha(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt,
(reg == VCPU_REGS_RSP) ?
(c->src.val = old_esp) : (c->src.val = c->regs[reg]);
- emulate_push(ctxt, ops);
-
- rc = writeback(ctxt, ops);
+ rc = emulate_push(ctxt, ops);
if (rc != X86EMUL_CONTINUE)
return rc;
++reg;
}
- /* Disable writeback. */
- c->dst.type = OP_NONE;
-
return rc;
}
@@ -1265,22 +1263,19 @@ int emulate_int_real(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt,
/* TODO: Add limit checks */
c->src.val = ctxt->eflags;
- emulate_push(ctxt, ops);
- rc = writeback(ctxt, ops);
+ rc = emulate_push(ctxt, ops);
if (rc != X86EMUL_CONTINUE)
return rc;
ctxt->eflags &= ~(EFLG_IF | EFLG_TF | EFLG_AC);
c->src.val = ops->get_segment_selector(VCPU_SREG_CS, ctxt->vcpu);
- emulate_push(ctxt, ops);
- rc = writeback(ctxt, ops);
+ rc = emulate_push(ctxt, ops);
if (rc != X86EMUL_CONTINUE)
return rc;
c->src.val = c->eip;
- emulate_push(ctxt, ops);
- rc = writeback(ctxt, ops);
+ rc = emulate_push(ctxt, ops);
if (rc != X86EMUL_CONTINUE)
return rc;
@@ -1475,6 +1470,7 @@ static inline int emulate_grp45(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt,
struct x86_emulate_ops *ops)
{
struct decode_cache *c = &ctxt->decode;
+ int rc = X86EMUL_CONTINUE;
switch (c->modrm_reg) {
case 0: /* inc */
@@ -1488,17 +1484,17 @@ static inline int emulate_grp45(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt,
old_eip = c->eip;
c->eip = c->src.val;
c->src.val = old_eip;
- emulate_push(ctxt, ops);
+ rc = emulate_push(ctxt, ops);
break;
}
case 4: /* jmp abs */
c->eip = c->src.val;
break;
case 6: /* push */
- emulate_push(ctxt, ops);
+ rc = emulate_push(ctxt, ops);
break;
}
- return X86EMUL_CONTINUE;
+ return rc;
}
static inline int emulate_grp9(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt,
@@ -2142,7 +2138,7 @@ static int emulator_do_task_switch(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt,
c->op_bytes = c->ad_bytes = (next_tss_desc.type & 8) ? 4 : 2;
c->lock_prefix = 0;
c->src.val = (unsigned long) error_code;
- emulate_push(ctxt, ops);
+ ret = emulate_push(ctxt, ops);
}
return ret;
@@ -2157,16 +2153,12 @@ int emulator_task_switch(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt,
int rc;
c->eip = ctxt->eip;
- c->dst.type = OP_NONE;
rc = emulator_do_task_switch(ctxt, ops, tss_selector, reason,
has_error_code, error_code);
- if (rc == X86EMUL_CONTINUE) {
- rc = writeback(ctxt, ops);
- if (rc == X86EMUL_CONTINUE)
- ctxt->eip = c->eip;
- }
+ if (rc == X86EMUL_CONTINUE)
+ ctxt->eip = c->eip;
return (rc == X86EMUL_UNHANDLEABLE) ? -1 : 0;
}
@@ -2184,8 +2176,7 @@ static void string_addr_inc(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt, unsigned seg,
static int em_push(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt)
{
- emulate_push(ctxt, ctxt->ops);
- return X86EMUL_CONTINUE;
+ return emulate_push(ctxt, ctxt->ops);
}
static int em_das(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt)
@@ -2245,20 +2236,12 @@ static int em_call_far(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt)
memcpy(&c->eip, c->src.valptr, c->op_bytes);
c->src.val = old_cs;
- emulate_push(ctxt, ctxt->ops);
- rc = writeback(ctxt, ctxt->ops);
+ rc = emulate_push(ctxt, ctxt->ops);
if (rc != X86EMUL_CONTINUE)
return rc;
c->src.val = old_eip;
- emulate_push(ctxt, ctxt->ops);
- rc = writeback(ctxt, ctxt->ops);
- if (rc != X86EMUL_CONTINUE)
- return rc;
-
- c->dst.type = OP_NONE;
-
- return X86EMUL_CONTINUE;
+ return emulate_push(ctxt, ctxt->ops);
}
static int em_ret_near_imm(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt)
@@ -3039,7 +3022,7 @@ special_insn:
emulate_2op_SrcV("add", c->src, c->dst, ctxt->eflags);
break;
case 0x06: /* push es */
- emulate_push_sreg(ctxt, ops, VCPU_SREG_ES);
+ rc = emulate_push_sreg(ctxt, ops, VCPU_SREG_ES);
break;
case 0x07: /* pop es */
rc = emulate_pop_sreg(ctxt, ops, VCPU_SREG_ES);
@@ -3049,14 +3032,14 @@ special_insn:
emulate_2op_SrcV("or", c->src, c->dst, ctxt->eflags);
break;
case 0x0e: /* push cs */
- emulate_push_sreg(ctxt, ops, VCPU_SREG_CS);
+ rc = emulate_push_sreg(ctxt, ops, VCPU_SREG_CS);
break;
case 0x10 ... 0x15:
adc: /* adc */
emulate_2op_SrcV("adc", c->src, c->dst, ctxt->eflags);
break;
case 0x16: /* push ss */
- emulate_push_sreg(ctxt, ops, VCPU_SREG_SS);
+ rc = emulate_push_sreg(ctxt, ops, VCPU_SREG_SS);
break;
case 0x17: /* pop ss */
rc = emulate_pop_sreg(ctxt, ops, VCPU_SREG_SS);
@@ -3066,7 +3049,7 @@ special_insn:
emulate_2op_SrcV("sbb", c->src, c->dst, ctxt->eflags);
break;
case 0x1e: /* push ds */
- emulate_push_sreg(ctxt, ops, VCPU_SREG_DS);
+ rc = emulate_push_sreg(ctxt, ops, VCPU_SREG_DS);
break;
case 0x1f: /* pop ds */
rc = emulate_pop_sreg(ctxt, ops, VCPU_SREG_DS);
@@ -3204,7 +3187,7 @@ special_insn:
break;
case 0x9c: /* pushf */
c->src.val = (unsigned long) ctxt->eflags;
- emulate_push(ctxt, ops);
+ rc = emulate_push(ctxt, ops);
break;
case 0x9d: /* popf */
c->dst.type = OP_REG;
@@ -3280,7 +3263,7 @@ special_insn:
long int rel = c->src.val;
c->src.val = (unsigned long) c->eip;
jmp_rel(c, rel);
- emulate_push(ctxt, ops);
+ rc = emulate_push(ctxt, ops);
break;
}
case 0xe9: /* jmp rel */
@@ -3605,7 +3588,7 @@ twobyte_insn:
c->dst.val = test_cc(c->b, ctxt->eflags);
break;
case 0xa0: /* push fs */
- emulate_push_sreg(ctxt, ops, VCPU_SREG_FS);
+ rc = emulate_push_sreg(ctxt, ops, VCPU_SREG_FS);
break;
case 0xa1: /* pop fs */
rc = emulate_pop_sreg(ctxt, ops, VCPU_SREG_FS);
@@ -3622,7 +3605,7 @@ twobyte_insn:
emulate_2op_cl("shld", c->src2, c->src, c->dst, ctxt->eflags);
break;
case 0xa8: /* push gs */
- emulate_push_sreg(ctxt, ops, VCPU_SREG_GS);
+ rc = emulate_push_sreg(ctxt, ops, VCPU_SREG_GS);
break;
case 0xa9: /* pop gs */
rc = emulate_pop_sreg(ctxt, ops, VCPU_SREG_GS);
--
1.7.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [RFC PATCH 2/2] KVM: x86 emulator: Cleanup emulate_push() writebacks
2011-03-28 16:34 ` [RFC PATCH 2/2] KVM: x86 emulator: Cleanup emulate_push() writebacks Takuya Yoshikawa
@ 2011-03-30 6:51 ` Takuya Yoshikawa
2011-04-03 14:50 ` Avi Kivity
1 sibling, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Takuya Yoshikawa @ 2011-03-30 6:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Takuya Yoshikawa; +Cc: avi, mtosatti, kvm, gleb
Takuya Yoshikawa <takuya.yoshikawa@gmail.com> wrote:
> @@ -1265,22 +1263,19 @@ int emulate_int_real(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt,
>
> /* TODO: Add limit checks */
> c->src.val = ctxt->eflags;
> - emulate_push(ctxt, ops);
> - rc = writeback(ctxt, ops);
> + rc = emulate_push(ctxt, ops);
> if (rc != X86EMUL_CONTINUE)
> return rc;
>
> ctxt->eflags &= ~(EFLG_IF | EFLG_TF | EFLG_AC);
>
> c->src.val = ops->get_segment_selector(VCPU_SREG_CS, ctxt->vcpu);
> - emulate_push(ctxt, ops);
> - rc = writeback(ctxt, ops);
> + rc = emulate_push(ctxt, ops);
> if (rc != X86EMUL_CONTINUE)
> return rc;
>
> c->src.val = c->eip;
> - emulate_push(ctxt, ops);
> - rc = writeback(ctxt, ops);
> + rc = emulate_push(ctxt, ops);
> if (rc != X86EMUL_CONTINUE)
> return rc;
I could also delete "c->dst.type = OP_NONE;" line here.
...
>
> static int em_push(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt)
> {
> - emulate_push(ctxt, ctxt->ops);
> - return X86EMUL_CONTINUE;
> + return emulate_push(ctxt, ctxt->ops);
> }
em_push() can be used instead of emulate_push() if we rearrange
the place to put em_push().
There seems to be some conflicting patches around. So If I get
some other comments, I'll rebase and resend later!
Takuya
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/2] KVM: x86 emulator: Disable writeback for CMP emulation
2011-03-28 16:32 [PATCH 1/2] KVM: x86 emulator: Disable writeback for CMP emulation Takuya Yoshikawa
2011-03-28 16:34 ` [RFC PATCH 2/2] KVM: x86 emulator: Cleanup emulate_push() writebacks Takuya Yoshikawa
@ 2011-04-03 14:42 ` Avi Kivity
1 sibling, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Avi Kivity @ 2011-04-03 14:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Takuya Yoshikawa; +Cc: mtosatti, kvm, yoshikawa.takuya, gleb
On 03/28/2011 06:32 PM, Takuya Yoshikawa wrote:
> From: Takuya Yoshikawa<yoshikawa.takuya@oss.ntt.co.jp>
>
> This stops "CMP r/m, reg" to write back the data into memory.
> Pointed out by Avi.
>
> Signed-off-by: Takuya Yoshikawa<yoshikawa.takuya@oss.ntt.co.jp>
> ---
> arch/x86/kvm/emulate.c | 2 ++
> 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/emulate.c b/arch/x86/kvm/emulate.c
> index 14c5ad5..8a73805 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/emulate.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/emulate.c
> @@ -3084,6 +3084,7 @@ special_insn:
> emulate_2op_SrcV("xor", c->src, c->dst, ctxt->eflags);
> break;
> case 0x38 ... 0x3d:
> + c->dst.type = OP_NONE; /* Disable writeback. */
> cmp: /* cmp */
Why not disable writeback here? As a prelude to having em_cmp() which
does everything?
I see SCAS also does a 'goto cmp', but it also benefits from disabling
writeback.
> emulate_2op_SrcV("cmp", c->src, c->dst, ctxt->eflags);
> break;
> @@ -3138,6 +3139,7 @@ special_insn:
> case 6:
> goto xor;
> case 7:
> + c->dst.type = OP_NONE; /* Disable writeback. */
> goto cmp;
> }
> break;
--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [RFC PATCH 2/2] KVM: x86 emulator: Cleanup emulate_push() writebacks
2011-03-28 16:34 ` [RFC PATCH 2/2] KVM: x86 emulator: Cleanup emulate_push() writebacks Takuya Yoshikawa
2011-03-30 6:51 ` Takuya Yoshikawa
@ 2011-04-03 14:50 ` Avi Kivity
2011-04-03 15:59 ` Takuya Yoshikawa
1 sibling, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Avi Kivity @ 2011-04-03 14:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Takuya Yoshikawa; +Cc: mtosatti, kvm, yoshikawa.takuya, gleb
On 03/28/2011 06:34 PM, Takuya Yoshikawa wrote:
> From: Takuya Yoshikawa<yoshikawa.takuya@oss.ntt.co.jp>
>
> Recently, emulate_push family functions started to call writeback()
> during their emulation. This clearly shows that the usual writeback()
> which is done at the end of x86_emulate_insn() cannot cover all cases.
> Furthermore, suppressing writeback by changing dst operand's type is
> not simple when conditional writeback must be taken care of.
>
> This patch improves this situation a bit by making emulate_push()
> itself do writeback and removes scattered writebacks from callers.
>
> This is done by splitting the writeback for OP_MEM case out from
> writeback() as a new helper function, writeback_to_mem(), and call it
> directly from emulate_push().
I think it's easier to just write directly instead of going through
'struct operand'.
Probably emulate_push() should do the write (look at segmented_write()
in my 'Emulator segment checks' patchset), and everything else can call
that. 'struct operand' is for multiplexing register/memory accesses,
which is not the case with the stack.
--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [RFC PATCH 2/2] KVM: x86 emulator: Cleanup emulate_push() writebacks
2011-04-03 14:50 ` Avi Kivity
@ 2011-04-03 15:59 ` Takuya Yoshikawa
2011-04-03 16:04 ` Avi Kivity
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Takuya Yoshikawa @ 2011-04-03 15:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Avi Kivity; +Cc: mtosatti, kvm, yoshikawa.takuya, gleb
> I think it's easier to just write directly instead of going through
> 'struct operand'.
>
> Probably emulate_push() should do the write (look at segmented_write()
> in my 'Emulator segment checks' patchset), and everything else can call
> that. 'struct operand' is for multiplexing register/memory accesses,
> which is not the case with the stack.
I agree with you. I will update!
IMHO, we are using dst operand for too many things.
In the case of CMP, I first tried to use src2 to clearly follow the
SDM's "second source operand" terminology. But it seemed not worth
it now.
Takuya
--
Takuya Yoshikawa <takuya.yoshikawa@gmail.com>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [RFC PATCH 2/2] KVM: x86 emulator: Cleanup emulate_push() writebacks
2011-04-03 15:59 ` Takuya Yoshikawa
@ 2011-04-03 16:04 ` Avi Kivity
2011-04-03 16:09 ` Takuya Yoshikawa
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Avi Kivity @ 2011-04-03 16:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Takuya Yoshikawa; +Cc: mtosatti, kvm, yoshikawa.takuya, gleb
On 04/03/2011 06:59 PM, Takuya Yoshikawa wrote:
> > I think it's easier to just write directly instead of going through
> > 'struct operand'.
> >
> > Probably emulate_push() should do the write (look at segmented_write()
> > in my 'Emulator segment checks' patchset), and everything else can call
> > that. 'struct operand' is for multiplexing register/memory accesses,
> > which is not the case with the stack.
>
> I agree with you. I will update!
>
>
> IMHO, we are using dst operand for too many things.
>
> In the case of CMP, I first tried to use src2 to clearly follow the
> SDM's "second source operand" terminology. But it seemed not worth
> it now.
>
Ah, CMP is encoded as dst/src, so it's best to just disable writeback
there. We could have a bit in the decode tables to auto-disable
writeback, but not sure it is worth it.
--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [RFC PATCH 2/2] KVM: x86 emulator: Cleanup emulate_push() writebacks
2011-04-03 16:04 ` Avi Kivity
@ 2011-04-03 16:09 ` Takuya Yoshikawa
2011-04-03 16:11 ` Avi Kivity
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Takuya Yoshikawa @ 2011-04-03 16:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Avi Kivity; +Cc: mtosatti, kvm, yoshikawa.takuya, gleb
> > IMHO, we are using dst operand for too many things.
> >
> > In the case of CMP, I first tried to use src2 to clearly follow the
> > SDM's "second source operand" terminology. But it seemed not worth
> > it now.
> >
>
> Ah, CMP is encoded as dst/src, so it's best to just disable writeback
> there. We could have a bit in the decode tables to auto-disable
> writeback, but not sure it is worth it.
One more question:
Why some functions in this file are defined using
"static inline" not just "static" ?
I should keep these "inline" ?
Takuya
--
Takuya Yoshikawa <takuya.yoshikawa@gmail.com>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [RFC PATCH 2/2] KVM: x86 emulator: Cleanup emulate_push() writebacks
2011-04-03 16:09 ` Takuya Yoshikawa
@ 2011-04-03 16:11 ` Avi Kivity
0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Avi Kivity @ 2011-04-03 16:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Takuya Yoshikawa; +Cc: mtosatti, kvm, yoshikawa.takuya, gleb
On 04/03/2011 07:09 PM, Takuya Yoshikawa wrote:
> > > IMHO, we are using dst operand for too many things.
> > >
> > > In the case of CMP, I first tried to use src2 to clearly follow the
> > > SDM's "second source operand" terminology. But it seemed not worth
> > > it now.
> > >
> >
> > Ah, CMP is encoded as dst/src, so it's best to just disable writeback
> > there. We could have a bit in the decode tables to auto-disable
> > writeback, but not sure it is worth it.
>
> One more question:
>
> Why some functions in this file are defined using
> "static inline" not just "static" ?
>
> I should keep these "inline" ?
>
Just 'static' is enough, the compiler can usually make the best decision
wrt. inline.
--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2011-04-03 16:11 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2011-03-28 16:32 [PATCH 1/2] KVM: x86 emulator: Disable writeback for CMP emulation Takuya Yoshikawa
2011-03-28 16:34 ` [RFC PATCH 2/2] KVM: x86 emulator: Cleanup emulate_push() writebacks Takuya Yoshikawa
2011-03-30 6:51 ` Takuya Yoshikawa
2011-04-03 14:50 ` Avi Kivity
2011-04-03 15:59 ` Takuya Yoshikawa
2011-04-03 16:04 ` Avi Kivity
2011-04-03 16:09 ` Takuya Yoshikawa
2011-04-03 16:11 ` Avi Kivity
2011-04-03 14:42 ` [PATCH 1/2] KVM: x86 emulator: Disable writeback for CMP emulation Avi Kivity
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox