RE: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] Make strace happy with xeno64.

To:	"Keir Fraser" <Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject:	RE: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] Make strace happy with xeno64.
From:	"Li, Xin B" <xin.b.li@xxxxxxxxx>
Date:	Fri, 10 Jun 2005 16:33:47 +0800
Cc:	xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivery-date:	Fri, 10 Jun 2005 08:33:08 +0000
Envelope-to:	www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
List-help:	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id:	Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post:	<mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe:	<http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe:	<http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
Sender:	xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thread-index:	AcVtk+Y1K8n5gLlgSZO4vrEqeegLZgAAw3cw
Thread-topic:	[Xen-devel] [PATCH] Make strace happy with xeno64.

Keir Fraser wrote:
> On 10 Jun 2005, at 09:00, Li, Xin B wrote:
> 
>> Hi Keir, do you have time to take a look at this patch?
>> -Xin 
>> 
>> Li, Xin B wrote:
>>> On x86_64, strace expects CS == 0x33 for 64bit
>>> applications and CS == 0x23 for 32bit applications, or
>>> it will complain. This patch makes strace happy with
>>> xeno64. 
> 
> The CS should be 0x23/0x33 -- no need for masking? Or is
> the fact that the upcall saved mask appears in bits 16-23
> of the '4-byte' CS value a problem? We can move the saved
> mask if so: I think that would be neater.

CS is 0xE033 for 64bit apps on xeno64.

> 
>   -- Keir

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

xen-devel

RE: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] Make strace happy with xeno64.