From: Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>
To: Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>
Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] KVM: x86: move nested-related kvm_x86_ops to a separate struct
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2020 12:11:59 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200417191159.GA14609@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200417190553.GI287932@xz-x1>
On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 03:05:53PM -0400, Peter Xu wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 12:44:10PM -0400, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> > While this reintroduces some pointer chasing that was removed in
> > afaf0b2f9b80 ("KVM: x86: Copy kvm_x86_ops by value to eliminate layer
> > of indirection", 2020-03-31), the cost is small compared to retpolines
> > and anyway most of the callbacks are not even remotely on a fastpath.
> > In fact, only check_nested_events should be called during normal VM
> > runtime. When static calls are merged into Linux my plan is to use them
> > instead of callbacks, and that will finally make things fast again by
> > removing the retpolines.
>
> Paolo,
>
> Just out of curiousity: is there an explicit reason to not copy the
> whole kvm_x86_nested_ops but use pointers (since after all we just
> reworked kvm_x86_ops)?
Ya, my vote would be to copy by value as well. I'd also be in favor of
dropping the _ops part, e.g.
struct kvm_x86_ops {
struct kvm_x86_nested_ops nested;
...
};
and drop the "nested" parts from the ops, e.g.
check_nested_events() -> check_events()
which yields:
r = kvm_x86_ops.nested.check_events(vcpu);
if (r != 0)
return r;
I had this coded up but shelved it when svm.c got fractured :-).
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-04-17 19:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-04-17 16:44 [PATCH 0/3] KVM: x86: move nested-related kvm_x86_ops to a separate struct Paolo Bonzini
2020-04-17 16:44 ` [PATCH 1/3] KVM: x86: check_nested_events is never NULL Paolo Bonzini
2020-04-20 8:47 ` Vitaly Kuznetsov
2020-04-17 16:44 ` [PATCH 2/3] KVM: eVMCS: check if nesting is enabled Paolo Bonzini
2020-04-20 8:49 ` Vitaly Kuznetsov
2020-04-17 16:44 ` [PATCH 3/3] KVM: x86: move nested-related kvm_x86_ops to a separate struct Paolo Bonzini
2020-04-20 8:54 ` Vitaly Kuznetsov
2020-04-17 19:05 ` [PATCH 0/3] " Peter Xu
2020-04-17 19:11 ` Sean Christopherson [this message]
2020-04-18 9:55 ` 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=20200417191159.GA14609@linux.intel.com \
--to=sean.j.christopherson@intel.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=peterx@redhat.com \
--cc=vkuznets@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).