>>> On 09.03.16 at 13:33, <shuai.r...@linux.intel.com> wrote: > On Wed, Mar 09, 2016 at 03:25:58AM -0700, Jan Beulich wrote: >> Btw., one more thing: Can't the exclusion of FP and SSE states in the logic >> determining which state set to save be extended to also include YMM? If > saved, >> YMM will also always live at a fixed place (an ASSERT() or BUG_ON() to > verify >> would of course be desirable). And if the guest didn't touch YMM registers, > the >> respective bit in the mask won't be set anyway. >> > YMM do live at the begining of the xsave extended area. But when we > exclude YMM like FP/SSE states ,if guest set YMM | XSTATE_NONLAZY respective > bitin xcro_accum, the over-writing may happend too. In such case , > vcpu_xsave_mask > will return XSTATE_NONLAZY, the first xstate of XSTATE_NONLAZY will be > xsaved at the begining of xsave extended area which may over-write YMM > state. > Do I miss something ?
Oh, yes, you're right. That would work only if YMM was part of NOLAZY. Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
