[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH RFC 2/3] xen/hvm: introduce a fpu_initialised filed to the CPU save record
El 14/10/15 a les 18.51, Andrew Cooper ha escrit: > On 14/10/15 17:24, Roger Pau Monne wrote: >> Introduce a new filed to signal if the FPU has been initialised or not. Xen > > "field", I am guessing? Yes. >> diff --git a/xen/include/public/arch-x86/hvm/save.h >> b/xen/include/public/arch-x86/hvm/save.h >> index c7560f2..c4863be 100644 >> --- a/xen/include/public/arch-x86/hvm/save.h >> +++ b/xen/include/public/arch-x86/hvm/save.h >> @@ -47,7 +47,8 @@ DECLARE_HVM_SAVE_TYPE(HEADER, 1, struct hvm_save_header); >> /* >> * Processor >> * >> - * Compat: Pre-3.4 didn't have msr_tsc_aux >> + * Compat2: Pre-4.7 didn't have fpu_initialised >> + * Compat1: Pre-3.4 didn't have msr_tsc_aux > > I would suggest reversing the Compat1 and 2 lines, to match chronology. OK, that's fine. >> */ >> >> struct hvm_hw_cpu { >> @@ -157,9 +158,121 @@ struct hvm_hw_cpu { >> }; >> /* error code for pending event */ >> uint32_t error_code; >> + /* is fpu initialised? */ >> + uint8_t fpu_initialised:1; > > Bitfields can't be used in the public ABI, and please don't leave > trailing implicit padding. Sadly we already have quite a lot of bitfields in the same file (see hvm_hw_vpic) but I understand why they shouldn't be used, specially if we do the versioning based on the size of the structure. > I would recommend uint32_t flags and specify that bit 0 indicates that > fpu context is initialised. Right. Roger. _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |