[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20131029101156.GX15657@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2013 12:11:56 +0200
From: Gleb Natapov <gleb@...hat.com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Andre Przywara <andre@...rep.de>,
Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
KVM <kvm@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/6] kvm, emulator: Add initial three-byte insns support
On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 11:04:57AM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 11:50:43AM +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > There are two three opcode tables, so third_opcode_byte is ambiguous.
>
> Actually there's also 0F_3A and there are also other prefixes besides f0
> and f1. Oh, and those tables are not completely full so I can imagine
> more stuff coming in later....
>
> I know what you're thinking by now, btw :-)
>
:)
> > What about pfx_0f_38_f0 and pfx_0f_38_f1?
>
> Yeah, those make it much more explicit.
>
> I wanted to keep the "three_byte" in the name in there somewhere,
> though, so that it is clear that we're dealing with three byte opcodes
> instead of requiring the onlooking innocent person to know the opcodes.
>
> How about:
>
> three_byte_0f_38_f0
> three_byte_0f_38_f1
> three_byte_0f_3a_50
> ...
>
> Last one is an example only.
>
Looks OK to me.
> Btw, we might want to reconsider that whole tabular representation when
> more stuff needs to be added...
>
Of course. When tables will start to show their limitation we can always
change to something else.
--
Gleb.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists