>>> Razvan Cojocaru <rcojoc...@bitdefender.com> 08/01/17 9:22 PM >>> >Since this seems to be blocked as-is, I propose transforming this patch >into a series, with one patch adding a new return code specifically for >unsupported instructions (X86_EMUL_UNIMPLEMENTED or >X86_EMUL_UNSUPPORTED?), and this patch sending the vm_event out only for >that. (In which case the event's name should probably change as well to >reflect the name of the new error code.)
Yes please (and I'd favor X86EMUL_UNIMPLEMENTED fwiw). Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
