On 11/30/22 22:43, Thomas Huth wrote:
On 30/11/2022 15.19, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
MMX state is saved/restored by FSAVE/FRSTOR so the instructions are
not illegal opcodes even if CR4.OSFXSR=0. Make sure that validate_vex
takes into account the prefix and only checks HF_OSFXSR_MASK in the
presence
On 30/11/2022 15.19, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
MMX state is saved/restored by FSAVE/FRSTOR so the instructions are
not illegal opcodes even if CR4.OSFXSR=0. Make sure that validate_vex
takes into account the prefix and only checks HF_OSFXSR_MASK in the
presence of an SSE instruction.
Fixes: 20581aad
On 11/30/22 06:19, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
MMX state is saved/restored by FSAVE/FRSTOR so the instructions are
not illegal opcodes even if CR4.OSFXSR=0. Make sure that validate_vex
takes into account the prefix and only checks HF_OSFXSR_MASK in the
presence of an SSE instruction.
Fixes: 20581aadec
MMX state is saved/restored by FSAVE/FRSTOR so the instructions are
not illegal opcodes even if CR4.OSFXSR=0. Make sure that validate_vex
takes into account the prefix and only checks HF_OSFXSR_MASK in the
presence of an SSE instruction.
Fixes: 20581aadec5e ("target/i386: validate VEX prefixes vi
