[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] Is: axe read_tscp pvops call. Was: Re: [RFC] ACPI S3 and Xen (suprisingly small\!).
On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 12:10:36PM -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 09:03:12AM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > > On 10/17/2012 06:49 AM, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > > > > > >Note: These are the other patches that went in 3.7-rc1: > > >xen/bootup: allow {read|write}_cr8 pvops call > > >[https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/10/10/339] > > >xen/bootup: allow read_tscp call for Xen PV guests. > > >[https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/10/10/340] > > > > > > > So WTF do we have a read_tscp PV call? Again, if there isn't a user > > we should just axe it... > > Let me spin off a patch to see if that can be done. It can be done faily easy. That said the only user that could _potentially_ use this (if the read_tscp had some extra logic to do 'readtsc' operations) would be the __vdso_getcpu. Meaning in __vdso_getcpu we would modify it from native_read_tscp to paravirt_read_tscp: notrace long __vdso_getcpu(unsigned *cpu, unsigned *node, struct getcpu_cache *unused) { unsigned int p; if (VVAR(vgetcpu_mode) == VGETCPU_RDTSCP) { /* Load per CPU data from RDTSCP */ ===> native_read_tscp(&p); } else { /* Load per CPU data from GDT */ asm("lsl %1,%0" : "=r" (p) : "r" (__PER_CPU_SEG)); } if (cpu) *cpu = p & 0xfff; if (node) *node = p >> 12; return 0; } but that line was added for a purpose, which was in git commit 8f12dea6135d0a55b151dcb4c6bbe211f5f8d35d Author: Glauber de Oliveira Costa <gcosta@xxxxxxxxxx> Date: Wed Jan 30 13:31:06 2008 +0100 x86: introduce native_read_tscp Targetting paravirt, this patch introduces native_read_tscp, in place of rdtscp() macro. When in a paravirt guest, this will involve a function call, and thus, cannot be done in the vdso area. These users then have to call the native version directly Signed-off-by: Glauber de Oliveira Costa <gcosta@xxxxxxxxxx> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> which implies that it since it is a vDSO area it cannot do paravirt calls anyhow. In other words, I think I'm OK with axing it. Going to spin a patch and ask for some other folks to review/double check. _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |