From: Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>
To: Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>
Cc: "Xiaoyao Li" <xiaoyao.li@intel.com>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
"Paolo Bonzini" <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
"Radim Krčmář" <rkrcmar@redhat.com>,
"Jim Mattson" <jmattson@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: X86: Make fpu allocation a common function
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2019 12:53:20 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87v9sq46vz.fsf@vitty.brq.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191014183723.GE22962@linux.intel.com>
Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com> writes:
> On Mon, Oct 14, 2019 at 06:58:49PM +0200, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
>> Xiaoyao Li <xiaoyao.li@intel.com> writes:
>>
>> > They are duplicated codes to create vcpu.arch.{user,guest}_fpu in VMX
>> > and SVM. Make them common functions.
>> >
>> > No functional change intended.
>>
>> Would it rather make sense to move this code to
>> kvm_arch_vcpu_create()/kvm_arch_vcpu_destroy() instead?
>
> Does it make sense? Yes. Would it actually work? No. Well, not without
> other shenanigans.
>
> FPU allocation can't be placed after the call to .create_vcpu() becuase
> it's consumed in kvm_arch_vcpu_init(). FPU allocation can't come before
> .create_vcpu() because the vCPU struct itself hasn't been allocated.
A very theoretical question: why do we have 'struct vcpu' embedded in
vcpu_vmx/vcpu_svm and not the other way around (e.g. in a union)? That
would've allowed us to allocate memory in common code and then fill in
vendor-specific details in .create_vcpu().
--
Vitaly
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-10-15 10:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-10-14 16:22 [PATCH] KVM: X86: Make fpu allocation a common function Xiaoyao Li
2019-10-14 16:58 ` Vitaly Kuznetsov
2019-10-14 18:37 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-15 0:48 ` Xiaoyao Li
2019-10-15 10:53 ` Vitaly Kuznetsov [this message]
2019-10-15 14:27 ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-10-15 14:36 ` Vitaly Kuznetsov
2019-10-15 16:14 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-15 16:36 ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-10-15 9:28 ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-10-16 1:52 ` Xiaoyao Li
2019-10-16 7:35 ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-10-16 7:48 ` Xiaoyao Li
2019-10-16 9:41 ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-10-17 16:05 ` Sean Christopherson
2019-10-21 13:09 ` Paolo Bonzini
2019-10-22 0:57 ` Xiaoyao Li
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87v9sq46vz.fsf@vitty.brq.redhat.com \
--to=vkuznets@redhat.com \
--cc=jmattson@google.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=rkrcmar@redhat.com \
--cc=sean.j.christopherson@intel.com \
--cc=xiaoyao.li@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.