From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/5] KVM: x86: allow defining return-0 static calls
Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2022 17:29:10 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Ygvi5jr4V8S/bKSe@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220214131614.3050333-6-pbonzini@redhat.com>
On Mon, Feb 14, 2022, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> A few vendor callbacks are only used by VMX, but they return an integer
> or bool value. Introduce KVM_X86_OP_RET0 for them: a NULL value in
s/KVM_X86_OP_RET0/KVM_X86_OP_OPTIONAL_RET0
And maybe "NULL func" instead of "NULL value", since some members of kvm_x86_ops
hold a value, not a func.
> struct kvm_x86_ops will be changed to __static_call_return0.
This implies kvm_x86_ops itself is changed, which is incorrect. "will be patched
to __static_call_return0() when updating static calls" or so.
> Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
> ---
> arch/x86/include/asm/kvm-x86-ops.h | 20 +++++++++++++-------
> arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h | 4 ++++
> arch/x86/kvm/svm/avic.c | 5 -----
> arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm.c | 26 --------------------------
> arch/x86/kvm/x86.c | 2 +-
> kernel/static_call.c | 1 +
> 6 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 39 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm-x86-ops.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm-x86-ops.h
> index 0a074354aaf7..ad75ff5ac220 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm-x86-ops.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm-x86-ops.h
> @@ -6,14 +6,19 @@ BUILD_BUG_ON(1)
> /*
> * KVM_X86_OP() and KVM_X86_OP_OPTIONAL() are used to help generate
> * "static_call()"s. They are also intended for use when defining
> - * the vmx/svm kvm_x86_ops. KVM_X86_OP_OPTIONAL() can be used for those
> + * the vmx/svm kvm_x86_ops.
> + *
> + * KVM_X86_OP_OPTIONAL() can be used for those
> * functions that can have a NULL definition, for example if
> * "static_call_cond()" will be used at the call sites.
> + * KVM_X86_OP_OPTIONAL_RET0() can be used likewise to make
> + * a definition optional, but in this case the default will
ERROR: trailing whitespace
#35: FILE: arch/x86/include/asm/kvm-x86-ops.h:15:
+ * a definition optional, but in this case the default will $
> + * be __static_call_return0.
Uber nit, __static_call_return0() to make it clear that that's a function, not a
magic return value (though arguably it's that too).
> */
> KVM_X86_OP(hardware_enable)
> KVM_X86_OP(hardware_disable)
> KVM_X86_OP(hardware_unsetup)
> -KVM_X86_OP(cpu_has_accelerated_tpr)
> +KVM_X86_OP_OPTIONAL_RET0(cpu_has_accelerated_tpr)
Can we instead just remove this helper entirely and return '1' unconditionally
from KVM_CAP_VAPIC?
The usage appears to be wrong, this will return '0' for VMX, '1' for SVM.
case KVM_CAP_VAPIC:
r = !static_call(kvm_x86_cpu_has_accelerated_tpr)();
break;
Further more, our uapi says:
/* Available with KVM_CAP_VAPIC */
#define KVM_TPR_ACCESS_REPORTING _IOWR(KVMIO, 0x92, struct kvm_tpr_access_ctl)
/* Available with KVM_CAP_VAPIC */
#define KVM_SET_VAPIC_ADDR _IOW(KVMIO, 0x93, struct kvm_vapic_addr)
But neither of those check cpu_has_accelerated_tpr(). QEMU doesn't check the
cap, and AFAICT neither does our VMM.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-02-15 17:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-02-14 13:16 [PATCH v2 0/5] kvm: x86: better handling of optional kvm_x86_ops Paolo Bonzini
2022-02-14 13:16 ` [PATCH v2 1/5] KVM: x86: use static_call_cond for optional callbacks Paolo Bonzini
2022-02-15 16:55 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-02-14 13:16 ` [PATCH v2 2/5] KVM: x86: remove KVM_X86_OP_NULL and mark optional kvm_x86_ops Paolo Bonzini
2022-02-15 17:08 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-02-15 17:09 ` Paolo Bonzini
2022-02-14 13:16 ` [PATCH v2 3/5] KVM: x86: warn on incorrectly NULL static calls Paolo Bonzini
2022-02-15 17:10 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-02-14 13:16 ` [PATCH v2 4/5] KVM: x86: make several APIC virtualization callbacks optional Paolo Bonzini
2022-02-15 17:12 ` Sean Christopherson
2022-02-14 13:16 ` [PATCH v2 5/5] KVM: x86: allow defining return-0 static calls Paolo Bonzini
2022-02-15 17:29 ` Sean Christopherson [this message]
2022-02-15 18:07 ` Paolo Bonzini
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=Ygvi5jr4V8S/bKSe@google.com \
--to=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.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.