|
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 3/6] x86/cpuid: Move all xstate leaf handling into guest_cpuid()
On 16/01/17 16:58, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 16.01.17 at 12:40, <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> @@ -1007,10 +864,13 @@ void guest_cpuid(const struct vcpu *v, uint32_t leaf,
>> break;
>>
>> case XSTATE_CPUID:
>> - if ( subleaf > ARRAY_SIZE(p->xstate.raw) )
>> + if ( !p->basic.xsave || subleaf >= ARRAY_SIZE(p->xstate.raw) )
>> return;
>>
>> - /* Fallthrough. */
>> + BUG_ON(subleaf >= ARRAY_SIZE(p->xstate.raw));
> Kind of pointless considering the if() right above? With this removed
> (or the reason for it clarified)
> Reviewed-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
It was for consistency with the other raw[] accesses, but given this
subleaf calculation, I can drop it.
>
>> @@ -1067,6 +927,31 @@ void guest_cpuid(const struct vcpu *v, uint32_t leaf,
>> break;
>> }
>> break;
>> +
>> + case XSTATE_CPUID:
>> + switch ( subleaf )
>> + {
>> + case 1:
>> + if ( p->xstate.xsaves )
>> + {
>> + /*
>> + * TODO: Figure out what to do for XSS state. VT-x manages
>> + * host vs guest MSR_XSS automatically, so as soon as we
>> start
>> + * supporting any XSS states, the wrong XSS will be in
>> + * context.
>> + */
>> + BUILD_BUG_ON(XSTATE_XSAVES_ONLY != 0);
> Yeah, I guess we won't have many options other than switching
> XSS around for the CPUID invocation.
The other option is to have a function which takes xcr0|xss and performs
some calculations with xstate_{offsets[],sizes[],align}, which might
plausibly be faster than switching MSR_XSS. Either way, this isn't a
problem I want to solve until I have a real piece of hardware using XSS
states to develop against.
~Andrew
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
![]() |
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |