[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH XTF] don't overrun memory object
On 23/01/17 11:09, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>> On 23.01.17 at 11:51, <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On 23/01/17 10:45, Andrew Cooper wrote: >>> On 23/01/17 10:30, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>> Using MOVUPS on an 8-byte quantity is wrong. There's no need for memory >>>> accesses in any of the probe_*() functions anyway - switch them all to >>>> insns without any operands or with register ones. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx> >>> So it is. >>> >>> The memory pointers were a leftover from trying to make this test not >>> use FEP (and therefore suitable for testing older Xen). >>> >>> IIRC, the problem was that even with a memory operand, hardware took >>> care of EM/MP/TS handling before taking a vmexit for MMIO emulation. >>> >>> Reviewed-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx> and committed. >> Having said that, this currently regresses the test: >> >> --- Xen Test Framework --- >> Environment: HVM 64bit (Long mode 4 levels) >> FPU Exception Emulation >> Testing x87 >> Testing x87 wait >> Testing MMX >> Testing SSE >> Testing SSE (CR4.OSFXSR) >> Testing emulated x87 >> Testing emulated x87 wait >> Testing emulated MMX >> Expected nothing, got #UD (cr0: - ) >> Expected #NM, got #UD (cr0: TS) >> Expected nothing, got #UD (cr0: MP) >> Expected #NM, got #UD (cr0: MP TS) >> Testing emulated SSE >> Testing emulated SSE (CR4.OSFXSR) >> Test result: FAILURE >> >> A secondary requirement (to not regress) is that the test only uses >> instructions present in the emulator in the past, which I chose as being >> the point when FEP got added (seeing as that is a hard dependency). > Ah, it didn't regress for me because I ran it on top of the SSE/AVX > emulation series. > >> Would you be happy if I dropped all but the final hunk, i.e. retaining >> the use of fildq and movq ? > Well, FNOP has always been supported, so I see no reason to drop > that. How about replacing PXOR by MOVQ (but retaining the register > operands)? (And I not that I left MOVUPS in place in error - I had > really meant to make it XORPS, but this now means one less think for > you to adjust.) Using mmx movq reg/reg does work. Fixed up and pushed. ~Andrew _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |