From: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>
Cc: Paul Durrant <paul.durrant@citrix.com>,
Xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] x86/emul: Pass shadow register state to the vmfunc() hook
Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2016 12:44:59 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <80effc9a-d9f4-1b02-9de1-8ae9baf4beaf@citrix.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <585B9C9C020000780012B8A9@prv-mh.provo.novell.com>
On 22/12/16 08:27, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 21.12.16 at 17:32, <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com> wrote:
>> vmfunc can in principle modify register state, so should operate on the shadow
>> register state rather than the starting state of emulation.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
> While in principle this is fine, I'd rather see the register state
> constified for now, to demonstrate it is not being modified. I'll
> submit my two remaining follow-up patches in a minute, and
> we can then discuss which of the two to take.
The question here is how likely it is that new functionality for VMFUNC
will be defined, which starts mutating the values.
I am not aware of anything new, so lets go with the const version for
now (as it is one fewer parameters). If this changes in the future, we
can easily switch back to passing the shadow register block.
~Andrew
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-12-22 12:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-12-21 16:32 [PATCH 1/2] x86/emul: Correct the return value handling of VMFUNC Andrew Cooper
2016-12-21 16:32 ` [PATCH 2/2] x86/emul: Pass shadow register state to the vmfunc() hook Andrew Cooper
2016-12-22 8:27 ` Jan Beulich
2016-12-22 12:44 ` Andrew Cooper [this message]
2016-12-22 8:25 ` [PATCH 1/2] x86/emul: Correct the return value handling of VMFUNC Jan Beulich
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=80effc9a-d9f4-1b02-9de1-8ae9baf4beaf@citrix.com \
--to=andrew.cooper3@citrix.com \
--cc=JBeulich@suse.com \
--cc=paul.durrant@citrix.com \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xen.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).