On 30/11/2015 18:34, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> target-i386/cpu.c:ext_save_area uses magic numbers for the xsave
> area offets and sizes, and target-i386/kvm.c:kvm_{put,get}_xsave()
> uses offset macros and bit manipulation to access the xsave area.
> This series changes both to use C structs for
On 30/11/2015 18:34, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> target-i386/cpu.c:ext_save_area uses magic numbers for the xsave
> area offets and sizes, and target-i386/kvm.c:kvm_{put,get}_xsave()
> uses offset macros and bit manipulation to access the xsave area.
> This series changes both to use C structs for
On Tue, Dec 01, 2015 at 11:22:31AM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 30/11/2015 18:34, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> > target-i386/cpu.c:ext_save_area uses magic numbers for the xsave
> > area offets and sizes, and target-i386/kvm.c:kvm_{put,get}_xsave()
> > uses offset macros and bit manipulation to
On 01/12/2015 16:25, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> > I think it's easier to use small guests (i.e. kvm-unit-tests) to test
> > this code.
>
> I agree it's easier, but how likely it is to catch bugs in the
> save/load code? If the code corrupts a register, we need to
> trigger a save/load cycle at the
On Tue, Dec 01, 2015 at 04:09:44PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
>
> On 30/11/2015 18:34, Eduardo Habkost wrote:
> > target-i386/cpu.c:ext_save_area uses magic numbers for the xsave
> > area offets and sizes, and target-i386/kvm.c:kvm_{put,get}_xsave()
> > uses offset macros and bit manipulation
target-i386/cpu.c:ext_save_area uses magic numbers for the xsave
area offets and sizes, and target-i386/kvm.c:kvm_{put,get}_xsave()
uses offset macros and bit manipulation to access the xsave area.
This series changes both to use C structs for those operations.
I still need to figure out a way to
