Re: [PATCH 09/10] KVM: SVM: Make lazy FPU switching work with nestedsvm

From: Avi Kivity
Date: Thu Feb 18 2010 - 09:32:19 EST


On 02/18/2010 01:38 PM, Joerg Roedel wrote:
TDB.


...

@@ -973,6 +973,7 @@ static void svm_decache_cr4_guest_bits(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)

static void update_cr0_intercept(struct vcpu_svm *svm)
{
+ struct vmcb *vmcb = svm->vmcb;
ulong gcr0 = svm->vcpu.arch.cr0;
u64 *hcr0 =&svm->vmcb->save.cr0;

@@ -984,11 +985,25 @@ static void update_cr0_intercept(struct vcpu_svm *svm)


if (gcr0 == *hcr0&& svm->vcpu.fpu_active) {
- svm->vmcb->control.intercept_cr_read&= ~INTERCEPT_CR0_MASK;
- svm->vmcb->control.intercept_cr_write&= ~INTERCEPT_CR0_MASK;
+ vmcb->control.intercept_cr_read&= ~INTERCEPT_CR0_MASK;
+ vmcb->control.intercept_cr_write&= ~INTERCEPT_CR0_MASK;
+ if (is_nested(svm)) {
+ struct vmcb *hsave = svm->nested.hsave;
+
+ hsave->control.intercept_cr_read&= ~INTERCEPT_CR0_MASK;
+ hsave->control.intercept_cr_write&= ~INTERCEPT_CR0_MASK;
+ vmcb->control.intercept_cr_read |= svm->nested.intercept_cr_read;
+ vmcb->control.intercept_cr_write |= svm->nested.intercept_cr_write;

Why are the last two lines needed?

+ }
} else {
svm->vmcb->control.intercept_cr_read |= INTERCEPT_CR0_MASK;
svm->vmcb->control.intercept_cr_write |= INTERCEPT_CR0_MASK;
+ if (is_nested(svm)) {
+ struct vmcb *hsave = svm->nested.hsave;
+
+ hsave->control.intercept_cr_read |= INTERCEPT_CR0_MASK;
+ hsave->control.intercept_cr_write |= INTERCEPT_CR0_MASK;
+ }
}
}

Maybe it's better to call update_cr0_intercept() after a vmexit instead, to avoid this repetition, and since the if () may take a different branch for the nested guest and guest cr0.


--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/