From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MuXtM-0006AV-C0 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 04 Oct 2009 16:41:16 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MuXtH-00068J-Ep for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 04 Oct 2009 16:41:15 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=37469 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MuXtH-00068E-8a for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 04 Oct 2009 16:41:11 -0400 Received: from mo-p00-ob.rzone.de ([81.169.146.161]:22972) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_3DES_EDE_CBC_SHA1:24) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MuXtG-0000AV-PM for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 04 Oct 2009 16:41:11 -0400 From: Kevin Wolf Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] x86: Fix exceptions for fxsave/fxrstor Date: Sun, 4 Oct 2009 22:43:54 +0200 References: <1254515337-14321-1-git-send-email-mail@kevin-wolf.de> <20091004100516.GN6691@hall.aurel32.net> In-Reply-To: <20091004100516.GN6691@hall.aurel32.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200910042243.54712@kevin-wolf.de> List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Aurelien Jarno Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org Am Sonntag, 4. Oktober 2009 12:05 schrieb Aurelien Jarno: > On Fri, Oct 02, 2009 at 10:28:57PM +0200, Kevin Wolf wrote: > > This patch corrects the following aspects of exception generation in > > fxsave/fxrstor: > > > > * Generate #GP if the operand is not aligned to a 16 byte boundary > > Agreed. > > > * Generate #UD if the LOCK prefix is used > > Agreed. > > > * For CR0.EM = 1 #NM is generated, not #UD > > This does not match the Intel manual: > | #NM If CR0.TS[bit 3] = 1. > | > | #UD If CR0.EM[bit 2] = 1. > | If CPUID.01H:EDX.FXSR[bit 24] = 0. > | If the LOCK prefix is used. > | Hm, you seem to have a different Intel manual. In my copy the CR0.EM part still belongs to #NM. Also, I ran my test code in KVM for comparision and it did generate an #NM (on two different machines, one Intel, one AMD), so I'm quite sure this is right (well, at least not completely wrong). On the other hand, I just had a look at the AMD documentation and it seems to support your version... So while my hardware suggests that #NM is right, I'm not going to insist on it. Maybe there is some hardware that actually does generate #UD. If you don't like to commit this part of the fix despite my explanation, just let me know and I'll resend the patch without it. Kevin