Hi, Keir,
This patch will fix wrong logic in determining Xsave return value in pv_cpuid().
I am sorry I made some mistakes in my last patch.
Signed-off-by: Shan Haitao <haitao.shan@intel.com>
diff -r 2dab09bcec81 xen/arch/x86/traps.c
--- a/xen/arch/x86/traps.c Sun Sep 18 00:25:57 2011 +0100
+++ b/xen/arch/x86/traps.c Sat Oct 08 04:24:40 2011 +0800
@@ -768,16 +768,18 @@ static void pv_cpuid(struct cpu_user_reg
if ( current->domain->domain_id != 0 )
{
+ unsigned int cpuid_leaf = a, sub_leaf = c;
+
if ( !cpuid_hypervisor_leaves(a, c, &a, &b, &c, &d) )
domain_cpuid(current->domain, a, c, &a, &b, &c,
&d);
- switch ( a )
+ switch ( cpuid_leaf )
{
case 0xd:
{
- unsigned int sub_leaf, _eax, _ebx, _ecx, _edx;
+ unsigned int _eax, _ebx, _ecx, _edx;
/* EBX value of main leaf 0 depends on enabled xsave features */
- if ( c == 0 && current->arch.xcr0 )
+ if ( sub_leaf == 0 && current->arch.xcr0 )
{
/* reset EBX to default value first */
b = XSTATE_AREA_MIN_SIZE;
@@ -785,8 +787,8 @@ static void pv_cpuid(struct cpu_user_reg
{
if ( !(current->arch.xcr0 & (1ULL <<
sub_leaf)) )
continue;
- domain_cpuid(current->domain, a, c, &_eax,
&_ebx, &_ecx,
- &_edx);
+ domain_cpuid(current->domain, cpuid_leaf, sub_leaf,
+ &_eax, &_ebx, &_ecx, &_edx);
if ( (_eax + _ebx) > b )
b = _eax + _ebx;
}
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel