Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 2/5] x86/domain: Initialise vcpu debug registers correctly

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 26.10.18 at 16:51, <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 26/10/2018 15:37, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>> On 26.10.18 at 16:22, <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> On 26/10/2018 14:31, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>>>> On 15.10.18 at 12:36, <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/domain.c
>>>>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/domain.c
>>>>> @@ -323,6 +323,18 @@ void free_vcpu_struct(struct vcpu *v)
>>>>>      free_xenheap_page(v);
>>>>>  }
>>>>>  
>>>>> +/* Initialise various registers to their architectural INIT/RESET state. 
>>>>> */
>>>>> +void arch_vcpu_regs_init(struct vcpu *v)
>>>>> +{
>>>>> +    v->arch.user_regs = (typeof(v->arch.user_regs)){
>>>>> +        .rflags = X86_EFLAGS_MBS,
>>>>> +    };
>>>> Sadly this initializer broke the build once again for gcc 4.3.x.
>>> Oh - that's unfortunate.  I guess it will need a memset instead.
>> Or we finally need to bump the minimum version we're happy with.
>>
>>>> (As a side note, using .eflags instead of .rflags would have a
>>>> fair chance of an omitted REX prefix.)
>>> You specifically requested rflags over eflags in your previous review.
>> Did I? I haven't been able to find v1 of this patch at all in the archives
>> (going back to May), or in my inbox (using just part of the title for
>> searching). Was that posted in private, or under a different title? I'm
>> trying to figure why I would have asked for that...
> 
> <5B17E80A02000078001C8C1D@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Hmm, yes, except that my mail client doesn't allow me to search for
mail IDs, or at least I don't know how I would do that. You don't
happen to have title, time stamp, or mail archive ref?

Jan



_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel