Re: [Xen-devel] RE: [Xen-staging] [xen-unstable] svm: Improve emulation of SMSW instruction for memory operands.

[Keir Fraser <Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 30/3/07 17:21, "Petersson, Mats" <Mats.Petersson@xxxxxxx> wrote:

> Shouldn't such assumptions be checked by a "BUG_ON", "ASSERT" or
> similar? It doesn't seem like difficult thing to check to me. And it's
> heck of a lot easier to figure out why it went completely horribly
> wrong, than when the code just happily continues to execute, but in the
> wrong place or in some incorrect way?
> 
> [I agree that there's like 0.1% chance that someone uses SMSW in 64-bit
> mode, but it's still a VALID instruction in that mode - and perhaps more
> importantly, it may be used in different addressing mode in 32-bit
> code.]

It's no worse than the code it replaces. Feel very free to send a patch.

 -- Keir



_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel