On 04/12/2011 03:22 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 03:19:00PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote: > On 04/12/2011 12:36 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote: > >mmio_index should be taken into account when copying data from > >userspace. > > > >Signed-off-by: Gleb Natapov<[email protected]> > >--- > > arch/x86/kvm/x86.c | 3 ++- > > 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > > >diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c > >index b568779..609c7ab 100644 > >--- a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c > >+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c > >@@ -5518,7 +5518,8 @@ static int complete_mmio(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > > if (vcpu->mmio_needed) { > > vcpu->mmio_needed = 0; > > if (!vcpu->mmio_is_write) > >- memcpy(vcpu->mmio_data, run->mmio.data, 8); > >+ memcpy(vcpu->mmio_data + vcpu->mmio_index, > >+ run->mmio.data, 8); > > vcpu->mmio_index += 8; > > if (vcpu->mmio_index< vcpu->mmio_size) { > > run->exit_reason = KVM_EXIT_MMIO; > > Interesting, the code passed the emulator.flat sse test. Does it now? > It pass now and before. Probably by chance.
I don't understand how. I explicitly set the values so that it would fail in that case.
Can you patch the test to fail with the current code?
But if I change read_emulated() to do int n = min(size, (unsigned)KVM_MMIO_SIZE); instead of int n = min(size, 8u); emulator.flat fails to emulate far jump instruction.
Ouch, looks like we have the multi-transaction support in two places. I guess this is what made sse mmio work.
Not sure what we should do (patch is fine, question is how to resolve the duplication).
-- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
