On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 1:48 PM, Marcelo Tosatti<mtosatti@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, Sep 01, 2009 at 12:48:18PM +0200, Mohammed Gamal wrote: >> - Change returned handle_invalid_guest_state() to return relevant exit codes >> - Move triggering the emulation from vmx_vcpu_run() to vmx_handle_exit() >> - Return to userspace instead of repeatedly trying to emulate instructions that have already failed >> >> Signed-off-by: Mohammed Gamal <m.gamal005@xxxxxxxxx> > > Mohammed, > > The handle_invalid_guest_state loop is potentially problematic. It would > be more appropriate to use the __vcpu_run loop. > > Can't you set vmx->emulation_required depending on the result > of one call to emulate_instruction and get rid of the while > (!guest_state_valid(vcpu)) loop? > Invalid state emulation is VMX-specfic, while the __vcpu_run loop is independent of the virtualization extension (defined in x86.c), no? AMD SVM can comforably run hosts in big-real mode and thus it doesn't have the notion of a guest going to an invalid state because of mode switching, so I don't think it'd be a good idea to move emulation into a generic layer. Please correct me if I am wrong -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
