 Home |
Products |
Support |
Community |
News |
xen-devel
[Xen-devel] svm: save_svm_cpu_user_regs vs. svm_store_cpu_guest_regs
| To: | <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | [Xen-devel] svm: save_svm_cpu_user_regs vs. svm_store_cpu_guest_regs |
| From: | "Jan Beulich" <jbeulich@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Wed, 09 May 2007 09:25:32 +0200 |
| Delivery-date: | Wed, 09 May 2007 00:23:17 -0700 |
| Envelope-to: | www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| 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 |
What is the reason for save_svm_cpu_user_regs() explicitly saving rax? Without this, the function could be eliminated, with its single use replaced by a call to svm_store_cpu_guest_regs(). Thanks, Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [Xen-devel] Is patches/linux-2.6.18/xen-hotplug.patch still necessary?, Keir Fraser |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [Xen-devel] vesafb, Jan Beulich |
| Previous by Thread: | [Xen-devel] [PATCH][RFC] consider weight for vcpu-pin case, Atsushi SAKAI |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [Xen-devel] svm: save_svm_cpu_user_regs vs. svm_store_cpu_guest_regs, Keir Fraser |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |
