Il 17/03/2014 18:38, H. Peter Anvin ha scritto:
I'm not sure what you mean with "valid real mode selectors"; the normal
case in big real mode is that either CS = SS = 0 or CS = SS = .
I mean "valid according to the VMX spec" for running in vm86 mode: base
= selector << 4, limit = 0x,
Il 17/03/2014 18:38, H. Peter Anvin ha scritto:
I'm not sure what you mean with valid real mode selectors; the normal
case in big real mode is that either CS = SS = 0 or CS = SS = some
program base address.
I mean valid according to the VMX spec for running in vm86 mode: base
= selector 4,
On 03/17/2014 10:01 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> the emulator).
>
> If CS and possibly SS are valid real mode selectors, it should be
> possible to run big real mode at almost-full speed, taking exits only
> for memory accesses via other segment registers. It is on my todo list,
> but not very
Il 17/03/2014 16:16, H. Peter Anvin ha scritto:
After seeing the sheer number of one-off additions, I'm wondering if going
through the opcode map systematically and see what is still missing might not
be a bad idea.
Memory access instructions always need emulation, but there aren't that
After seeing the sheer number of one-off additions, I'm wondering if going
through the opcode map systematically and see what is still missing might not
be a bad idea.
On March 17, 2014 2:30:43 AM PDT, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>Il 15/03/2014 23:42, H. Peter Anvin ha scritto:
>> Stupid question...
Il 15/03/2014 23:39, H. Peter Anvin ha scritto:
MOVAPS, MOVAPD, and MOVDQA are the same operation. They may, architecturally,
have different performance characteristics, but nothing that would affect an
emulator.
In fact MOVAPS and MOVAPD are implemented the same way in this patch:
Il 15/03/2014 21:01, Igor Mammedov ha scritto:
MS HCK test fails on 32-bit Windows 8.1 due to missing MOVAPS
instruction emulation, this series adds it and while at it,
it adds emulation of MOVAPD which is trivial to implement on
top of MOVAPS.
Igor Mammedov (2):
KVM: x86 emulator: emulate
Il 15/03/2014 23:42, H. Peter Anvin ha scritto:
Stupid question... what instructions do NOT need emulsion in KVM? It would seem
that at least anything that touches memory would?
Yes, indeed. Anything that touches memory can be used on MMIO and then
needs emulation.
Paolo
On March 15,
Il 15/03/2014 23:42, H. Peter Anvin ha scritto:
Stupid question... what instructions do NOT need emulsion in KVM? It would seem
that at least anything that touches memory would?
Yes, indeed. Anything that touches memory can be used on MMIO and then
needs emulation.
Paolo
On March 15,
Il 15/03/2014 21:01, Igor Mammedov ha scritto:
MS HCK test fails on 32-bit Windows 8.1 due to missing MOVAPS
instruction emulation, this series adds it and while at it,
it adds emulation of MOVAPD which is trivial to implement on
top of MOVAPS.
Igor Mammedov (2):
KVM: x86 emulator: emulate
Il 15/03/2014 23:39, H. Peter Anvin ha scritto:
MOVAPS, MOVAPD, and MOVDQA are the same operation. They may, architecturally,
have different performance characteristics, but nothing that would affect an
emulator.
In fact MOVAPS and MOVAPD are implemented the same way in this patch:
After seeing the sheer number of one-off additions, I'm wondering if going
through the opcode map systematically and see what is still missing might not
be a bad idea.
On March 17, 2014 2:30:43 AM PDT, Paolo Bonzini pbonz...@redhat.com wrote:
Il 15/03/2014 23:42, H. Peter Anvin ha scritto:
Il 17/03/2014 16:16, H. Peter Anvin ha scritto:
After seeing the sheer number of one-off additions, I'm wondering if going
through the opcode map systematically and see what is still missing might not
be a bad idea.
Memory access instructions always need emulation, but there aren't that
On 03/17/2014 10:01 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
the emulator).
If CS and possibly SS are valid real mode selectors, it should be
possible to run big real mode at almost-full speed, taking exits only
for memory accesses via other segment registers. It is on my todo list,
but not very high.
Stupid question... what instructions do NOT need emulsion in KVM? It would seem
that at least anything that touches memory would?
On March 15, 2014 1:01:58 PM PDT, Igor Mammedov wrote:
>MS HCK test fails on 32-bit Windows 8.1 due to missing MOVAPS
>instruction emulation, this series adds it and
MOVAPS, MOVAPD, and MOVDQA are the same operation. They may, architecturally,
have different performance characteristics, but nothing that would affect an
emulator.
On March 15, 2014 1:01:58 PM PDT, Igor Mammedov wrote:
>MS HCK test fails on 32-bit Windows 8.1 due to missing MOVAPS
MOVAPS, MOVAPD, and MOVDQA are the same operation. They may, architecturally,
have different performance characteristics, but nothing that would affect an
emulator.
On March 15, 2014 1:01:58 PM PDT, Igor Mammedov imamm...@redhat.com wrote:
MS HCK test fails on 32-bit Windows 8.1 due to missing
Stupid question... what instructions do NOT need emulsion in KVM? It would seem
that at least anything that touches memory would?
On March 15, 2014 1:01:58 PM PDT, Igor Mammedov imamm...@redhat.com wrote:
MS HCK test fails on 32-bit Windows 8.1 due to missing MOVAPS
instruction emulation, this
18 matches
Mail list logo
