Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 3/8] x86/vm-event/monitor: relocate code-motion more appropriately

[Corneliu ZUZU <czuzu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 7/4/2016 5:16 PM, Razvan Cojocaru wrote:
> On 07/04/16 17:05, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > > > > On 04.07.16 at 15:22, <rcojocaru@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > On 07/04/16 13:22, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > > > > > > On 30.06.16 at 20:43, <czuzu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > > @@ -119,6 +156,55 @@ bool_t monitored_msr(const struct domain *d, u32 msr)
> > > > >       return test_bit(msr, bitmap);
> > > > >   }
> > > > >   
> > > > > +static void write_ctrlreg_adjust_traps(struct domain *d)
> > > > > +{
> > > > > +    struct vcpu *v;
> > > > > +    struct arch_vmx_struct *avmx;
> > > > > +    unsigned int cr3_bitmask;
> > > > > +    bool_t cr3_vmevent, cr3_ldexit;
> > > > > +
> > > > > +    /* Adjust CR3 load-exiting. */
> > > > > +
> > > > > +    /* vmx only */
> > > > > +    ASSERT(cpu_has_vmx);
> > > > > +
> > > > > +    /* non-hap domains trap CR3 writes unconditionally */
> > > > > +    if ( !paging_mode_hap(d) )
> > > > > +    {
> > > > > +        for_each_vcpu ( d, v )
> > > > > +            ASSERT(v->arch.hvm_vmx.exec_control & CPU_BASED_CR3_LOAD_EXITING);
> > > > > +        return;
> > > > > +    }
> > > > > +
> > > > > +    cr3_bitmask = monitor_ctrlreg_bitmask(VM_EVENT_X86_CR3);
> > > > > +    cr3_vmevent = !!(d->arch.monitor.write_ctrlreg_enabled & cr3_bitmask);
> > > > > +
> > > > > +    for_each_vcpu ( d, v )
> > > > > +    {
> > > > > +        avmx = &v->arch.hvm_vmx;
> > > > > +        cr3_ldexit = !!(avmx->exec_control & CPU_BASED_CR3_LOAD_EXITING);
> > > > > +
> > > > > +        if ( cr3_vmevent == cr3_ldexit )
> > > > > +            continue;
> > > > > +
> > > > > +        /*
> > > > > +         * If CR0.PE=0, CR3 load exiting must remain enabled.
> > > > > +         * See vmx_update_guest_cr code motion for cr = 0.
> > > > > +         */
> > > > > +        if ( cr3_ldexit && !hvm_paging_enabled(v) && !vmx_unrestricted_guest(v)
> > > > > )
> > > > > +            continue;
> > > > > +
> > > > > +        if ( cr3_vmevent )
> > > > > +            avmx->exec_control |= CPU_BASED_CR3_LOAD_EXITING;
> > > > > +        else
> > > > > +            avmx->exec_control &= ~CPU_BASED_CR3_LOAD_EXITING;
> > > > > +
> > > > > +        vmx_vmcs_enter(v);
> > > > > +        vmx_update_cpu_exec_control(v);
> > > > > +        vmx_vmcs_exit(v);
> > > > > +    }
> > > > > +}
> > > > While Razvan gave his ack already, I wonder whether it's really a
> > > > good idea to put deeply VMX-specific code outside of a VMX-specific
> > > > file.
> > > Didn't I add "for monitor / vm_event parts Acked-by: ..."? If I didn't,
> > > I meant to.
> > Well - this is a monitor file (monitor.c).
> Fair enough, I should have been more detailed here. I do see the merit
> of your suggestion, and so FWIW I second your suggestion to move the
> code to some VMX-specific part of the tree if possible.
But did you also see my reply concerning this suggestion? :-)

> Thanks,
> Razvan
Thanks,
Corneliu.

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