Re: [Xen-devel] [Patch] x86emul: simplify prefix handling for VMFUNC

["Lai, Paul" <paul.c.lai@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 01:47:56AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 27.09.16 at 19:43, <paul.c.lai@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Finally found the vmfunc opcode page in Vol 3 30.3, VMX Instruction 
> > Reference.
> > Agreed, there's no mention of prefixes, "pfx", on this page.  It appears
> > that the other VMX instructions in this section don't mention prefixes 
> > either.
> > Looking at Table A-6 "Opcode Extensions for One- and Two-Byte Opcodes":
> > vmcall, vmlaunch, vmresume, and vmxoff would need similar updating.
> 
> Indeed.
> 
> > I can ask for updating of the VMX instuctions to include mention of 
> > prefixes.
> > Anything else as I gather requirements?
> 
> I don't think so, but of course if would be nice to get confirmed (ahead
> of the SDM update going public, which presumably will take some time)
> that for all of those presence of said prefixes will cause #UD, as that
> goes beyond stating that "they're reserved" (which is all the footnote
> says).
> 
> Jan
> 
Got word that there's an effort to clean up the SDM in general, and this
section in particular.  Also, the word is that it'll be early next year (2017)
before something comes out.  No expectation was set of when an early draft
would be available.

-Paul

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