WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
   
 
 
Xen 
 
Home Products Support Community News
 
   
 

xen-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] x86_emulate adjustments

To: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] x86_emulate adjustments
From: Keir Fraser <keir@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2007 14:34:02 +0000
Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivery-date: Fri, 05 Jan 2007 06:33:49 -0800
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <459E4B54.76E4.0078.0@xxxxxxxxxx>
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: Accw1os1ybks7pzJEduFdAAX8io7RQ==
Thread-topic: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] x86_emulate adjustments
User-agent: Microsoft-Entourage/11.2.5.060620
On 5/1/07 11:57, "Jan Beulich" <jbeulich@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>> I already got the mis-emulation of x86/64 PUSH/POP with operand-size
>> override. The stacksz thing I would do differently -- extend the mode input
>> field to have an extra stack-address-size field. There's another thing
>> that's not right at the moment -- I think on POP we have to calculate the
>> operand effective address after adjusting the stack pointer? That is broken
>> right now which is not a good thing. :-)
> 
> The patch sent actually fixes that.

Oh yes, that's neat. But it should increment the effective address by
op_bytes not by stacksz. stacksz only specifies the stack pointer's width,
not stack data size.

> I finally also want the main one fixed. And yes, there are problems with the
> prefix decoding, which can possibly be ignored when emulation pv guest insns,
> but which (in my opinion) should match hardware behavior 1:1 for hvm guests.

I don't see any problem with the existing code w.r.t. what is
architecturally supported. REX byte must come after all prefix bytes, and
Intel says that only 4 prefix bytes are allowed. REPNE is not a valid prefix
on any instruction that the emulator currently supports. If instructions are
outside these defined boundaries we must have some scope for interpretation?

 -- Keir


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