On 11/08/16 15:09, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 11.08.16 at 15:41, wrote:
>> On 11/08/16 13:05, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>> There's no need for having identical code spelled out twice.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich
>>>
>>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/x86_emulate/x86_emulate.c
>>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/x86_emul
>>> On 11.08.16 at 15:41, wrote:
> On 11/08/16 13:05, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> There's no need for having identical code spelled out twice.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich
>>
>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/x86_emulate/x86_emulate.c
>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/x86_emulate/x86_emulate.c
>> @@ -1979,9 +1979,12 @@ x8
On 11/08/16 13:05, Jan Beulich wrote:
> There's no need for having identical code spelled out twice.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich
>
> --- a/xen/arch/x86/x86_emulate/x86_emulate.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/x86_emulate/x86_emulate.c
> @@ -1979,9 +1979,12 @@ x86_emulate(
> goto done;
>
There's no need for having identical code spelled out twice.
Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich
--- a/xen/arch/x86/x86_emulate/x86_emulate.c
+++ b/xen/arch/x86/x86_emulate/x86_emulate.c
@@ -1979,9 +1979,12 @@ x86_emulate(
goto done;
break;
case SrcImm:
+if ( !(d & Byte