>>> On 19.07.18 at 16:20, <paul.durr...@citrix.com> wrote: >> From: Jan Beulich [mailto:jbeul...@suse.com] >> Sent: 19 July 2018 11:49 >> @@ -1046,6 +1060,8 @@ static int __hvmemul_read( >> pfec |= PFEC_implicit; >> else if ( hvmemul_ctxt->seg_reg[x86_seg_ss].dpl == 3 ) >> pfec |= PFEC_user_mode; >> + if ( access_type == hvm_access_insn_fetch ) >> + pfec |= PFEC_insn_fetch; > > Since you OR the insn_fetch flag in here... > >> >> rc = hvmemul_virtual_to_linear( >> seg, offset, bytes, &reps, access_type, hvmemul_ctxt, &addr); >> @@ -1059,7 +1075,8 @@ static int __hvmemul_read( >> >> rc = ((access_type == hvm_access_insn_fetch) ? >> hvm_fetch_from_guest_linear(p_data, addr, bytes, pfec, &pfinfo) : > > ...could you not just use hvm_copy_from_guest_linear() here regardless of > access_type (and just NULL out the cache argument if it is an insn_fetch)? > > AFAICT the only reason hvm_fetch_from_guest_linear() exists is to OR the > extra flag in.
Well, technically it looks like I indeed could. I'm not sure that's good idea though - the visual separation of "copy" vs "fetch" is helpful I think. Let's see if I get any opinions by others in one or the other direction. Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
