WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
   
 
 
Xen 
 
Home Products Support Community News
 
   
 

xen-devel

RE: [Xen-devel] more segment/selector handling woes

>> Note the wording 'as if' - this doesn't tell me whether the 
>> internal base
>> address field (which gets stored to the vmcb) can indeed be 
>> relied upon.
>> But obviously the code would be simpler if that was the case 
>> in reality
>> (and then perhaps the documentation could be updated accordingly).
>
>I believe it would contain whatever is in the [GL]DT... It's ignored by
>the processor (treated as zero). So, you'd have to check if it's GS/FS
>or not, and then use either 0 or [fg]s.base accordingly. 

Can you verify this with you hardware guys? It would mean that I'd
also have to change the implementation of get_segment_base()
that I introduced with a patch yesterday.

>Note that one bit in EFER also allows limits for 64-bit segments, but I
>think it's only ever used by VMWare, so it's probably OK to ignore the
>limits completely (in 64-bit mode at least). 

Is this being detailed anywhere? Namely, whether there's a CPUID
feature flag for this (or is it always available), and how one would
obtain 64-bit wide limits? I merely can see the flag being defined in
the NPT BIOS And Kernel Developer's Guide (the public
Programmer's Manual doesn't even know this).

Jan

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel