Re: [Xen-devel] Future x86 emulator direction

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 13.12.16 at 13:00, <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> During the most recent Cambridge Hackathon (April 2016), there was a
> suggestion made (sorry - I don't recall from whom) to feed the the
> SVM/VMX intercept information into a slightly more general emulate
> framework, rather than to try to implement common functionality in 3
> separate locations.

I don't recall such a suggestion, so can you perhaps share a few
more of the details? Is this to basically invoke the insn emulator
here (once suitable extended)? If so, I think we may want to
approach this the other direction - first make the emulator
complete enough to be usable here, and only then funnel those
code paths into it. And to be honest, on the road towards
completion of the emulator I think the SVM/VMX insns are pretty
close to the end of the priority list.

> On a different stance, we currently have multiple bits of code
> implementing accessing/caching/updating of segment registers for hvm
> guests.  With the introduction of the ->validate() hook, we should be
> able to share all of this logic between the shadow and general emulation
> paths, as it isn't use-dependent.

I fully agree that any elimination of code duplication is a good
goal.

Jan


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