From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2636 invoked by alias); 12 Oct 2009 02:21:52 -0000 Received: (qmail 2628 invoked by uid 22791); 12 Oct 2009 02:21:51 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SARE_MSGID_LONG40,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail-qy0-f178.google.com (HELO mail-qy0-f178.google.com) (209.85.221.178) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Mon, 12 Oct 2009 02:21:47 +0000 Received: by qyk8 with SMTP id 8so7983009qyk.24 for ; Sun, 11 Oct 2009 19:21:45 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.229.33.15 with SMTP id f15mr2302713qcd.59.1255314105171; Sun, 11 Oct 2009 19:21:45 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4AD28E95.1050404@vmware.com> References: <1255182393-15292-1-git-send-email-freephp@gmail.com> <4AD28E95.1050404@vmware.com> From: Jiang Jilin Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2009 02:21:00 -0000 Message-ID: <7d77a27d0910111921v13a8e8acpb98c29a9aa72ed8@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH] Rewrite the codes for opcode 0x0f01 and add more instructions support To: Michael Snyder Cc: Hui Zhu , gdb-patches ml , "tromey@redhat.com" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2009-10/txt/msg00223.txt.bz2 On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 10:04 AM, Michael Snyder wrote: > Jiang Jilin wrote: >> >> Hi, guys >> >> I've rewrite the codes for opcode 0x0f01 with more readable, add >> xgetbv/xsetbv/rdtscp/vmcall/vmlaunch/vmresume/vmxoff instructions >> support as well. >> >> However, I'm *not* sure it's whether right or not, especially with >> the new supported instructions beginning with "vm". And I remove all >> codes to save EFLAGS register which is not specified to be saved by >> Intel's manual, so please help me review them. >> >> Luckily, there is no regression when using precord.exp board file to tes= t. >> >> At last but not least, there is some differences in gdb.sum when >> 'make check' before and after applying this patch. I cannot make >> a decision whether it's correct, so please help me. The diff are >> as follows: > > Ah well, but you see, now the change is too big to be accepted > without a copyright assignment. =A0Do you want to start the process > of filing one? I've done as Joel told me, now I just wait for the paper arrival. Anyway, thank you! :) > [Cc: Tom Tromey] > --=20 Jiang