[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] This patch fixes several issues related to vmxassist




On 1 Apr 2006, at 16:51, Li, Xin B wrote:

Yes, I'll push this one: I like the extra sanity checking. Why are the
checks for zero and greater-than-gdt-limit required (why is it
insufficient to merely check the current mode)?

You got it :-), and I also suspect they are not required.
I just keep it there and seems it's not harmful, when we are sure they
are not needed, we can remove it.

I still think using and maintaining shadow segment state would ultimately be the correct solution. But it sounds like I was mistaken about how big real mode works -- I didn't realise writing a segment register in real mode doesn't update the hidden segment limit register and that's the trick that creates big real mode. That given, the current approach isn't so bad (there's already an acceptable kludge in there to deal with 'stale' hidden base addresses when switching protected-to-real mode) and perhaps we'll get away with leaving the code alone now. It's obviously a pain to revalidate it on a wide range of systems if we start making bigger and more fundamental changes to it. Also, I trust that Leendert knows rather more about the transitory real/protected modes than I do. :-)

 -- Keir


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


 


Rackspace

Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.