Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v10 16/20] x86/VPMU: Merge vpmu_rdmsr and vpmu_wrmsr

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 04.09.14 at 05:41, <boris.ostrovsky@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> @@ -199,11 +192,11 @@ int vpmu_do_interrupt(struct cpu_user_regs *regs)
>          vpmu_reset(vpmu, VPMU_CONTEXT_SAVE | VPMU_CONTEXT_LOADED);
>  
>          /* Store appropriate registers in xenpmu_data */
> -        if ( is_pv_32bit_domain(sampled->domain) )
> +        if ( is_pv_32bit_domain(sampling->domain) )
>          {
>              /*
>               * 32-bit dom0 cannot process Xen's addresses (which are 64 bit)
> -             * and therefore we treat it the same way as a non-priviledged
> +             * and therefore we treat it the same way as a non-privileged
>               * PV 32-bit domain.
>               */
>              struct compat_cpu_user_regs *cmp;

This whole hunk doesn't seem to belong here (and the first part of
it seems actually wrong).


> --- a/xen/include/asm-x86/hvm/vpmu.h
> +++ b/xen/include/asm-x86/hvm/vpmu.h
> @@ -95,9 +95,12 @@ static inline bool_t vpmu_are_all_set(const struct 
> vpmu_struct *vpmu,
>      return !!((vpmu->flags & mask) == mask);
>  }
>  
> +#define VPMU_MSR_READ  0
> +#define VPMU_MSR_WRITE 1
> +
>  void vpmu_lvtpc_update(uint32_t val);
> -int vpmu_do_wrmsr(unsigned int msr, uint64_t msr_content, uint64_t 
> supported);
> -int vpmu_do_rdmsr(unsigned int msr, uint64_t *msr_content);
> +int vpmu_do_msr(unsigned int msr, uint64_t *msr_content,
> +                uint64_t supported, int rw);

Just like I think I said on another patch: Perhaps worth keeping the
old functions as inline wrappers? And perhaps making the new
parameter simply boolean?

Jan


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel