Message ID | 20230912232113.402347-1-andrew.cooper3@citrix.com (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
Headers | show |
Series | x86/pv: #DB vs %dr6 fixes, part 2 | expand |
On 13/09/2023 12:21 am, Andrew Cooper wrote: > Slightly RFC. This is the next chunk of debug fixes from the bug that Jinoh > reported. I was trying to do a bit of due diligence before posting v2, and have made some discoveries. pv/emul-priv-op SingleStep vs Branch Step https://gitlab.com/xen-project/xen/-/work_items/170 HVM IO Breakpoints: https://gitlab.com/xen-project/xen/-/work_items/171 A third which I'm on the fence about is about PV guests and General Detect. We firmly prohibit PV guests from setting DR7.GD, but we them play with the DR6.GD bit as if it had been asserted. It would be easy to put GD back into the set of reserved bits for DR6, but it also wouldn't be hard to handle GD via dr7_emul and let the PV guest have a more-normal looking set of debug functionality. Thoughts? ~Andrew
On 15.09.2023 21:56, Andrew Cooper wrote: > A third which I'm on the fence about is about PV guests and General > Detect. We firmly prohibit PV guests from setting DR7.GD, but we them > play with the DR6.GD bit as if it had been asserted. > > It would be easy to put GD back into the set of reserved bits for DR6, > but it also wouldn't be hard to handle GD via dr7_emul and let the PV > guest have a more-normal looking set of debug functionality. Anything "more-normal looking" is to be preferred, I would say. As long as, like you say here, it isn't overly hard. Jan