|
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Ping: [PATCH] x86emul: avoid using _PRE_EFLAGS() in a few cases
On 02.06.2021 16:37, Jan Beulich wrote:
> The macro expanding to quite a few insns, replace its use by simply
> clearing the status flags when the to be executed insn doesn't depend
> on their initial state, in cases where this is easily possible. (There
> are more cases where the uses are hidden inside macros, and where some
> of the users of the macros want guest flags put in place before running
> the insn, i.e. the macros can't be updated as easily.)
>
> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
Anyone?
Thanks, Jan
> --- a/xen/arch/x86/x86_emulate/x86_emulate.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/x86_emulate/x86_emulate.c
> @@ -6863,7 +6863,8 @@ x86_emulate(
> }
> opc[2] = 0xc3;
>
> - invoke_stub(_PRE_EFLAGS("[eflags]", "[mask]", "[tmp]"),
> + _regs.eflags &= ~EFLAGS_MASK;
> + invoke_stub("",
> _POST_EFLAGS("[eflags]", "[mask]", "[tmp]"),
> [eflags] "+g" (_regs.eflags),
> [tmp] "=&r" (dummy), "+m" (*mmvalp)
> @@ -8111,7 +8112,8 @@ x86_emulate(
> opc[2] = 0xc3;
>
> copy_VEX(opc, vex);
> - invoke_stub(_PRE_EFLAGS("[eflags]", "[mask]", "[tmp]"),
> + _regs.eflags &= ~EFLAGS_MASK;
> + invoke_stub("",
> _POST_EFLAGS("[eflags]", "[mask]", "[tmp]"),
> [eflags] "+g" (_regs.eflags),
> "=a" (dst.val), [tmp] "=&r" (dummy)
> @@ -11698,13 +11700,14 @@ int x86_emul_rmw(
> break;
>
> case rmw_xadd:
> + *eflags &= ~EFLAGS_MASK;
> switch ( state->op_bytes )
> {
> unsigned long dummy;
>
> #define XADD(sz, cst, mod) \
> case sz: \
> - asm ( _PRE_EFLAGS("[efl]", "[msk]", "[tmp]") \
> + asm ( "" \
> COND_LOCK(xadd) " %"#mod"[reg], %[mem]; " \
> _POST_EFLAGS("[efl]", "[msk]", "[tmp]") \
> : [reg] "+" #cst (state->ea.val), \
>
>
|
![]() |
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |