On 02.09.2019 16:36, Alexandru Stefan ISAILA wrote:
> Is there a way we can go on with this issue?
As long as Andrew wouldn't change his mind, all I can suggest is
that you avoid making your change dependent upon mine. If I (again)
end up reviewing it, I'll have to keep in mind to judge on it usin
On 27.08.2019 11:26, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 20.08.2019 22:11, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>> On 30/07/2019 15:54, Jan Beulich wrote:
@@ -622,14 +622,22 @@ static void *hvmemul_map_linear_addr(
}
if ( p2mt == p2m_ioreq_server )
- {
On 20.08.2019 22:11, Andrew Cooper wrote:
On 30/07/2019 15:54, Jan Beulich wrote:
@@ -622,14 +622,22 @@ static void *hvmemul_map_linear_addr(
}
if ( p2mt == p2m_ioreq_server )
-{
-err = NULL;
goto out;
-
On 30/07/2019 15:54, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> @@ -622,14 +622,22 @@ static void *hvmemul_map_linear_addr(
>>}
>>
>>if ( p2mt == p2m_ioreq_server )
>> -{
>> -err = NULL;
>>goto out;
>> -}
>>
>>AS
On 30.07.2019 17:54, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 30.07.2019 16:12, Alexandru Stefan ISAILA wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 30.07.2019 16:27, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>> On 30.07.2019 14:21, Alexandru Stefan ISAILA wrote:
> @@ -629,6 +697,14 @@ static void *hvmemul_map_linear_addr(
>
>>>
On 30.07.2019 16:12, Alexandru Stefan ISAILA wrote:
>
>
> On 30.07.2019 16:27, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 30.07.2019 14:21, Alexandru Stefan ISAILA wrote:
>>>
@@ -629,6 +697,14 @@ static void *hvmemul_map_linear_addr(
ASSERT(p2mt == p2m_ram_
On 30.07.2019 16:27, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 30.07.2019 14:21, Alexandru Stefan ISAILA wrote:
>>
>>> @@ -629,6 +697,14 @@ static void *hvmemul_map_linear_addr(
>>>
>>> ASSERT(p2mt == p2m_ram_logdirty ||
>>> !p2m_is_readonly(p2mt));
>>>
On 30.07.2019 14:21, Alexandru Stefan ISAILA wrote:
>
>> @@ -629,6 +697,14 @@ static void *hvmemul_map_linear_addr(
>>
>>ASSERT(p2mt == p2m_ram_logdirty ||
>> !p2m_is_readonly(p2mt));
>>}
>> +
>> +if ( curr->arch.vm_e
> @@ -629,6 +697,14 @@ static void *hvmemul_map_linear_addr(
>
> ASSERT(p2mt == p2m_ram_logdirty ||
> !p2m_is_readonly(p2mt));
> }
> +
> +if ( curr->arch.vm_event &&
> +curr->arch.vm_event->send_event &&
>>
On 29.07.2019 10:12, Alexandru Stefan ISAILA wrote:
>
>
> On 19.07.2019 17:23, Razvan Cojocaru wrote:
>> On 7/19/19 4:38 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>> On 19.07.2019 15:30, Razvan Cojocaru wrote:
On 7/19/19 4:18 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 19.07.2019 14:34, Alexandru Stefan ISAILA wrote:
>>>
On 19.07.2019 17:23, Razvan Cojocaru wrote:
> On 7/19/19 4:38 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 19.07.2019 15:30, Razvan Cojocaru wrote:
>>> On 7/19/19 4:18 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 19.07.2019 14:34, Alexandru Stefan ISAILA wrote:
> On 18.07.2019 15:58, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 03.07.201
On 19.07.2019 16:18, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 19.07.2019 14:34, Alexandru Stefan ISAILA wrote:
>> On 18.07.2019 15:58, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>> On 03.07.2019 12:56, Alexandru Stefan ISAILA wrote:
Currently, we are fully emulating the instruction at RIP when the hardware
sees
an EPT
On 19.07.2019 16:18, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 19.07.2019 14:34, Alexandru Stefan ISAILA wrote:
>> On 18.07.2019 15:58, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>> On 03.07.2019 12:56, Alexandru Stefan ISAILA wrote:
A/D bit writes (on page walks) can be considered benign by an introspection
agent, so receivin
On 7/19/19 4:38 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 19.07.2019 15:30, Razvan Cojocaru wrote:
On 7/19/19 4:18 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 19.07.2019 14:34, Alexandru Stefan ISAILA wrote:
On 18.07.2019 15:58, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 03.07.2019 12:56, Alexandru Stefan ISAILA wrote:
A/D bit writes (on page wa
On 19.07.2019 15:30, Razvan Cojocaru wrote:
> On 7/19/19 4:18 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 19.07.2019 14:34, Alexandru Stefan ISAILA wrote:
>>> On 18.07.2019 15:58, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 03.07.2019 12:56, Alexandru Stefan ISAILA wrote:
> A/D bit writes (on page walks) can be considered ben
On 7/19/19 4:18 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 19.07.2019 14:34, Alexandru Stefan ISAILA wrote:
On 18.07.2019 15:58, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 03.07.2019 12:56, Alexandru Stefan ISAILA wrote:
A/D bit writes (on page walks) can be considered benign by an introspection
agent, so receiving vm_events for t
On 19.07.2019 14:34, Alexandru Stefan ISAILA wrote:
> On 18.07.2019 15:58, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 03.07.2019 12:56, Alexandru Stefan ISAILA wrote:
>>> A/D bit writes (on page walks) can be considered benign by an introspection
>>> agent, so receiving vm_events for them is a pessimization. We try
On 18.07.2019 15:58, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 03.07.2019 12:56, Alexandru Stefan ISAILA wrote:
>> A/D bit writes (on page walks) can be considered benign by an introspection
>> agent, so receiving vm_events for them is a pessimization. We try here to
>> optimize by fitering these events out.
>
>
On 03.07.2019 12:56, Alexandru Stefan ISAILA wrote:
> A/D bit writes (on page walks) can be considered benign by an introspection
> agent, so receiving vm_events for them is a pessimization. We try here to
> optimize by fitering these events out.
But you add the sending of more events - how does "
On 12.07.2019 04:28, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 11.07.2019 19:13, Tamas K Lengyel wrote:
>>> @@ -629,6 +697,14 @@ static void *hvmemul_map_linear_addr(
>>>
>>>ASSERT(p2mt == p2m_ram_logdirty || !p2m_is_readonly(p2mt));
>>>}
>>> +
>>> +if ( curr->arch.vm_event &&
>
On 11.07.2019 19:13, Tamas K Lengyel wrote:
>> @@ -629,6 +697,14 @@ static void *hvmemul_map_linear_addr(
>>
>> ASSERT(p2mt == p2m_ram_logdirty || !p2m_is_readonly(p2mt));
>> }
>> +
>> +if ( curr->arch.vm_event &&
>> +curr->arch.vm_event->send_event &&
>
> @@ -629,6 +697,14 @@ static void *hvmemul_map_linear_addr(
>
> ASSERT(p2mt == p2m_ram_logdirty || !p2m_is_readonly(p2mt));
> }
> +
> +if ( curr->arch.vm_event &&
> +curr->arch.vm_event->send_event &&
Why not fold these checks into hvm_emulate_send_vm_eve
A/D bit writes (on page walks) can be considered benign by an introspection
agent, so receiving vm_events for them is a pessimization. We try here to
optimize by fitering these events out.
Currently, we are fully emulating the instruction at RIP when the hardware sees
an EPT fault with npfec.kind !
23 matches
Mail list logo
