[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Ping: [PATCH] x86emul: avoid using _PRE_EFLAGS() in a few cases
On 02.06.2021 16:37, Jan Beulich wrote: > The macro expanding to quite a few insns, replace its use by simply > clearing the status flags when the to be executed insn doesn't depend > on their initial state, in cases where this is easily possible. (There > are more cases where the uses are hidden inside macros, and where some > of the users of the macros want guest flags put in place before running > the insn, i.e. the macros can't be updated as easily.) > > Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx> Anyone? Thanks, Jan > --- a/xen/arch/x86/x86_emulate/x86_emulate.c > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/x86_emulate/x86_emulate.c > @@ -6863,7 +6863,8 @@ x86_emulate( > } > opc[2] = 0xc3; > > - invoke_stub(_PRE_EFLAGS("[eflags]", "[mask]", "[tmp]"), > + _regs.eflags &= ~EFLAGS_MASK; > + invoke_stub("", > _POST_EFLAGS("[eflags]", "[mask]", "[tmp]"), > [eflags] "+g" (_regs.eflags), > [tmp] "=&r" (dummy), "+m" (*mmvalp) > @@ -8111,7 +8112,8 @@ x86_emulate( > opc[2] = 0xc3; > > copy_VEX(opc, vex); > - invoke_stub(_PRE_EFLAGS("[eflags]", "[mask]", "[tmp]"), > + _regs.eflags &= ~EFLAGS_MASK; > + invoke_stub("", > _POST_EFLAGS("[eflags]", "[mask]", "[tmp]"), > [eflags] "+g" (_regs.eflags), > "=a" (dst.val), [tmp] "=&r" (dummy) > @@ -11698,13 +11700,14 @@ int x86_emul_rmw( > break; > > case rmw_xadd: > + *eflags &= ~EFLAGS_MASK; > switch ( state->op_bytes ) > { > unsigned long dummy; > > #define XADD(sz, cst, mod) \ > case sz: \ > - asm ( _PRE_EFLAGS("[efl]", "[msk]", "[tmp]") \ > + asm ( "" \ > COND_LOCK(xadd) " %"#mod"[reg], %[mem]; " \ > _POST_EFLAGS("[efl]", "[msk]", "[tmp]") \ > : [reg] "+" #cst (state->ea.val), \ > >
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |