On 02/11/18 13:00, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 02.11.18 at 13:54, <[email protected]> wrote:
>> @@ -191,9 +197,26 @@ struct vm_event_regs_x86 {
>>      uint64_t msr_efer;
>>      uint64_t msr_star;
>>      uint64_t msr_lstar;
>> +    uint32_t cs_base;
>> +    uint32_t ss_base;
>> +    uint32_t ds_base;
>> +    uint32_t es_base;
>>      uint64_t fs_base;
>>      uint64_t gs_base;
>> -    uint32_t cs_arbytes;
>> +    struct vm_event_x86_selector_reg cs;
>> +    struct vm_event_x86_selector_reg ss;
>> +    struct vm_event_x86_selector_reg ds;
>> +    struct vm_event_x86_selector_reg es;
>> +    struct vm_event_x86_selector_reg fs;
>> +    struct vm_event_x86_selector_reg gs;
>> +    uint64_t shadow_gs;
>> +    uint64_t dr6;
>> +    uint16_t cs_sel;
>> +    uint16_t ss_sel;
>> +    uint16_t ds_sel;
>> +    uint16_t es_sel;
>> +    uint16_t fs_sel;
>> +    uint16_t gs_sel;
>>      uint32_t _pad;
>>  };
> Do we really need dr6 be 64 bits wide?

Given that the other %cr and %dr registers are 64bit, I'd argue in
favour of consistency.

~Andrew

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel

Reply via email to