Re: [Xen-devel] [Patch] x86emul: simplify prefix handling for VMFUNC

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 27.09.16 at 19:43, <paul.c.lai@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Finally found the vmfunc opcode page in Vol 3 30.3, VMX Instruction Reference.
> Agreed, there's no mention of prefixes, "pfx", on this page.  It appears
> that the other VMX instructions in this section don't mention prefixes either.
> Looking at Table A-6 "Opcode Extensions for One- and Two-Byte Opcodes":
> vmcall, vmlaunch, vmresume, and vmxoff would need similar updating.

Indeed.

> I can ask for updating of the VMX instuctions to include mention of prefixes.
> Anything else as I gather requirements?

I don't think so, but of course if would be nice to get confirmed (ahead
of the SDM update going public, which presumably will take some time)
that for all of those presence of said prefixes will cause #UD, as that
goes beyond stating that "they're reserved" (which is all the footnote
says).

Jan


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel