From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KFryP-0006Zw-8g for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 07 Jul 2008 10:45:49 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KFryK-0006Yb-6C for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 07 Jul 2008 10:45:48 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=52128 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KFryK-0006YW-0V for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 07 Jul 2008 10:45:44 -0400 Received: from gecko.sbs.de ([194.138.37.40]:23569) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1KFryI-0005dh-8j for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 07 Jul 2008 10:45:43 -0400 Received: from mail2.sbs.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by gecko.sbs.de (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m67EjB4m017294 for ; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 16:45:11 +0200 Received: from [139.25.109.167] (mchn012c.mchp.siemens.de [139.25.109.167] (may be forged)) by mail2.sbs.de (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id m67EjA00023405 for ; Mon, 7 Jul 2008 16:45:11 +0200 Message-ID: <48722BF4.8050000@siemens.com> Date: Mon, 07 Jul 2008 16:45:08 +0200 From: Jan Kiszka MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <48721086.2010506@siemens.com> <48721EEE.2060903@bellard.org> <48722392.4020800@siemens.com> In-Reply-To: <48722392.4020800@siemens.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH] x86-64: Fix 64-bit lgs/lfs/lss Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org Jan Kiszka wrote: > Fabrice Bellard wrote: >> Hi, >> >> OK, at least for Intel CPUs. From the AMD & Intel specs, the behavior >> seems to differ between the two. If it is really the case, a CPU >> specific config bit is needed. Unfortunately there may be other corner >> cases where AMD and Intel differ in 64 bit mode. > > Indeed, just checked: there is a difference in the specs. Will update > this patch to make it CPU-specific. Hmm, there is no Intel cpu type yet that supports 64-bit... So I guess we better keeps things as-is for now before claiming to be Intel-compatible while other broken corner cases are waiting to bite us. Jan