On Wed, 8 Aug 2007, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Wed, 8 Aug 2007, Andi Kleen wrote: > > >> paranoid_restore\trace: > >> RESTORE_ALL 8 > >> - iretq > >> + INTERRUPT_RETURN > > > >I suspect Xen will need much more changes anyways because of its > >ring 3 guest. Are these changes sufficient for lguest? > > > The above was what I was replying to. If you were talking about the general iretq => INTERRUPT_RETURN, then the answer is "Yes, they are sufficient". The first version of lguest ran the guest kernel in ring 3 (using dual page tables for guest kernel and guest user). The current version I'm pushing runs lguest in ring 1, and the entry.S code worked for both. -- Steve _______________________________________________ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
