search for: iopl

With this patch, x86 and x86-64 share ioport.c, fixing LTP iopl and ioperm testcase failures (on both). We found an iopl testcase failing even on x86 xenlinux. Now x86-64 xenlinux should have the same results regarding the LTP testcases (as far as we tested). Signed-off-by: Li B Xin <li.b.xin@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Jun Nakajima <jun.nakajima@intel...

I found a clever way to make the extra IOPL switching invisible to non-paravirt compiles - since kernel_rpl is statically defined to be zero there, and only non-zero rpl kernel have a problem restoring IOPL, as popf does not restore IOPL flags unless run at CPL-0. Subject: IOPL handling for paravirt guests Signed-off-by: Zachary Amsden <...

I found a clever way to make the extra IOPL switching invisible to non-paravirt compiles - since kernel_rpl is statically defined to be zero there, and only non-zero rpl kernel have a problem restoring IOPL, as popf does not restore IOPL flags unless run at CPL-0. Subject: IOPL handling for paravirt guests Signed-off-by: Zachary Amsden <...

...le_mmio -> hvm_emulate_one() -> x86_emulate() to emulate I/O instructions. Also nowadays, the realmode emulation code walks through the path: vmx_realmode() -> realmode_emulate_one() -> hvm_emulate_one() -> x86_emulate().       The I/O handle code in x86_emulate() checks the cpl and iopl value, and if cpl > iopl, it will generate a GP fault. This causes Linux guest installation failure and Windows 2000 boot failure. I think this check code may be not reasonable for two aspects:       1. If x86_emulate() is called from vmexit or from realmode emulation, I think this line of cod...

Being a new Ubuntu 10.10 user, I am trying to get Wine to work in order to access some of my previous WIN XP programs. When I try to use Outlook (from which it is still difficult to migrate to an appropriate Linux Prog), I always get the "IOPL not enabled" message. I have tried the fix with adding the gdiplus in libraries and changing it. But there is no effect. If the "solution" is still to reinstall the windows programs, I am simply not prepared to invest all that time. I refuse to enter the discussion about continued us...

Hi Josh, On Tue, Oct 22, 2013, at 3:35, Josh Triplett wrote: > On the vast majority of modern systems, no processes will use the > userspsace I/O syscalls, iopl and ioperm. Add a new config option, > CONFIG_X86_IOPORT, to support configuring them out of the kernel > entirely. Since these syscalls only exist to support rare legacy > userspace programs, X86_IOPORT does not depend on EXPERT, though it does > still default to y. > > In add...

Hi Josh, On Tue, Oct 22, 2013, at 3:35, Josh Triplett wrote: > On the vast majority of modern systems, no processes will use the > userspsace I/O syscalls, iopl and ioperm. Add a new config option, > CONFIG_X86_IOPORT, to support configuring them out of the kernel > entirely. Since these syscalls only exist to support rare legacy > userspace programs, X86_IOPORT does not depend on EXPERT, though it does > still default to y. > > In add...

On Sun, 2 Nov 2014 09:33:01 -0800 Josh Triplett <josh at joshtriplett.org> wrote: > On the vast majority of modern systems, no processes will use the > userspsace IO syscalls, iopl and ioperm. Add a new config option, > CONFIG_X86_IOPORT, to support configuring them out of the kernel > entirely. Most current systems do not run programs using these > syscalls, so X86_IOPORT does not depend on EXPERT, though it does still > default to y. This isn't unreasonab...

...sid/squeeze x86_64 installed. Wine is version 1.0.1. WinXP partition is NTFS and mounted read-only under Debian. I have used winecfg to attach the NTFS partition to my drive E: and use winefile to navigate to the microsoft office 11 binaries on E:. Both winword.exe and excel.exe reports the famous IOPL not enabled message. I have not installed any office related files into my ~/.wine hierarchy. I tried several other windows applications that I have installed on the NTFS partition: Foxit PDF reader starts nicely, Googles Picasa 3 starts nicely, Several programs that I didn't expect to start ac...

On Sun, 2 Nov 2014 09:33:01 -0800 Josh Triplett <josh at joshtriplett.org> wrote: > On the vast majority of modern systems, no processes will use the > userspsace IO syscalls, iopl and ioperm. Add a new config option, > CONFIG_X86_IOPORT, to support configuring them out of the kernel > entirely. Most current systems do not run programs using these > syscalls, so X86_IOPORT does not depend on EXPERT, though it does still > default to y. This isn't unreasonab...

It doesn't look like iopl() is working. I'm taking an exception on every IO instruction. inl(0xde04) = 00000100 eip:765e eax:0100 ebx:0000 ecx:0320 edx:de04 esi:03f5 edi:0087 ebp:0000 esp:6b62 cs:c000 ss:c000 es:0000 ds:c000 fs:0000 gs:0000 eflags:00000246 exception: code at 0x000c7661: 66 ef 5a 59 66 58 9d c3 53 bb...

..._flush_tlb_global, diff -r 320f0d4d2280 arch/i386/kernel/process.c --- a/arch/i386/kernel/process.c Tue Dec 12 13:50:50 2006 -0800 +++ b/arch/i386/kernel/process.c Tue Dec 12 13:50:53 2006 -0800 @@ -665,6 +665,37 @@ struct task_struct fastcall * __switch_t load_TLS(next, cpu); /* + * Restore IOPL if needed. + */ + if (unlikely(prev->iopl != next->iopl)) + set_iopl_mask(next->iopl); + + /* + * Now maybe handle debug registers and/or IO bitmaps + */ + if (unlikely((task_thread_info(next_p)->flags & _TIF_WORK_CTXSW) + || test_tsk_thread_flag(prev_p, TIF_IO_BITMAP))) +...

..._flush_tlb_global, diff -r 320f0d4d2280 arch/i386/kernel/process.c --- a/arch/i386/kernel/process.c Tue Dec 12 13:50:50 2006 -0800 +++ b/arch/i386/kernel/process.c Tue Dec 12 13:50:53 2006 -0800 @@ -665,6 +665,37 @@ struct task_struct fastcall * __switch_t load_TLS(next, cpu); /* + * Restore IOPL if needed. + */ + if (unlikely(prev->iopl != next->iopl)) + set_iopl_mask(next->iopl); + + /* + * Now maybe handle debug registers and/or IO bitmaps + */ + if (unlikely((task_thread_info(next_p)->flags & _TIF_WORK_CTXSW) + || test_tsk_thread_flag(prev_p, TIF_IO_BITMAP))) +...

On the vast majority of modern systems, no processes will use the userspsace I/O syscalls, iopl and ioperm. Add a new config option, CONFIG_X86_IOPORT, to support configuring them out of the kernel entirely. Most current systems do not run programs using these syscalls, so X86_IOPORT does not depend on EXPERT, though it does still default to y. In addition to saving a significant amount of...

On the vast majority of modern systems, no processes will use the userspsace I/O syscalls, iopl and ioperm. Add a new config option, CONFIG_X86_IOPORT, to support configuring them out of the kernel entirely. Since these syscalls only exist to support rare legacy userspace programs, X86_IOPORT does not depend on EXPERT, though it does still default to y. In addition to saving a significant...

I get "IOPL not enabled" error when loading WINWORD.EXE. I have XP installed on a NTFS partition, and "office pro 2003" version. Anybody ran on this problem?? jose -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-users/attachme...

On Mon, Nov 03, 2014 at 12:10:49PM +0000, One Thousand Gnomes wrote: > On Sun, 2 Nov 2014 09:33:01 -0800 > Josh Triplett <josh at joshtriplett.org> wrote: > > > On the vast majority of modern systems, no processes will use the > > userspsace IO syscalls, iopl and ioperm. Add a new config option, > > CONFIG_X86_IOPORT, to support configuring them out of the kernel > > entirely. Most current systems do not run programs using these > > syscalls, so X86_IOPORT does not depend on EXPERT, though it does still > > default to y. >...

> > This isn't unreasonable but there are drivers with userspace helpers that > > use iopl/ioperm type functionality where you should be doing a SELECT of > > X86_IOPORT. The one that comes to mind is the uvesa driver. From a quick > > scan it may these days be the only mainstream one that needs the select > > adding. > > Should kernel drivers really express depe...

> > This isn't unreasonable but there are drivers with userspace helpers that > > use iopl/ioperm type functionality where you should be doing a SELECT of > > X86_IOPORT. The one that comes to mind is the uvesa driver. From a quick > > scan it may these days be the only mainstream one that needs the select > > adding. > > Should kernel drivers really express depe...

...irtio driver(s). This has been done independently by Intel, Brocade/Vyatta, and 6Wind. Sorry, it has to stay. On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 7:35 PM, Josh Triplett <josh at joshtriplett.org> wrote: > On the vast majority of modern systems, no processes will use the > userspsace I/O syscalls, iopl and ioperm. Add a new config option, > CONFIG_X86_IOPORT, to support configuring them out of the kernel > entirely. Since these syscalls only exist to support rare legacy > userspace programs, X86_IOPORT does not depend on EXPERT, though it does > still default to y. > > In addi...