From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Joel Schopp <joel.schopp@amd.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86: svm: make wbinvd faster
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2015 10:58:03 -0600
Message-ID: <54F4969B.8080806@amd.com>
References: <20150228001917.15247.41063.stgit@joelvmguard2.amd.com>
 <jpg4mq45dyn.fsf@redhat.com> <20150302135925.GA26739@potion.brq.redhat.com>
 <jpgmw3v2zgx.fsf@redhat.com> <20150302160319.GA25123@potion.brq.redhat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8;
	format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE
Cc: Gleb Natapov <gleb@kernel.org>,
	Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>, <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
	David Kaplan <David.Kaplan@amd.com>,
	Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>,
	Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>,
	<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
To: =?UTF-8?B?UmFkaW0gS3LEjW3DocWZ?= <rkrcmar@redhat.com>,
	Bandan Das <bsd@redhat.com>
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <20150302160319.GA25123@potion.brq.redhat.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org


On 03/02/2015 10:03 AM, Radim Kr=C4=8Dm=C3=A1=C5=99 wrote:
> 2015-03-02 10:25-0500, Bandan Das:
>> Radim Kr=C4=8Dm=C3=A1=C5=99 <rkrcmar@redhat.com> writes:
>>> 2015-03-01 21:29-0500, Bandan Das:
>>>> Joel Schopp <joel.schopp@amd.com> writes:
>>>>> +static int wbinvd_interception(struct vcpu_svm *svm)
>>>>> +{
>>>>> +	kvm_emulate_wbinvd(&svm->vcpu);
>>>>> +	skip_emulated_instruction(&svm->vcpu);
>>>>> +	return 1;
>>>>> +}
>>>> Can't we merge this to kvm_emulate_wbinvd, and just call that func=
tion
>>>> directly for both vmx and svm ?
>>> kvm_emulate_wbinvd() lives in x86.c and skip_emulated_instruction()=
 is
>>> from svm.c/vmx.c:  so we'd have to create a new x86 op and change t=
he
>>> emulator code as well ... it's probably better like this.
>> There's already one - kvm_x86_ops->skip_emulated_instruction
> My bad, its usage is inconsistent and I only looked at two close
> interceptions where it was used ... kvm_emulate_cpuid() calls
> kvm_x86_ops->skip_emulated_instruction(), while kvm_emulate_halt() an=
d
> kvm_emulate_hypercall() need an external skip.
>
> We do "skip" the instruction with kvm_emulate(), so automatically
> skipping the instruction on kvm_emulate_*() makes sense:
>   1. rename kvm_emulate_halt() and kvm_emulate_wbinvd() to accommodat=
e
>      callers that don't want to skip
>   2. introduce kvm_emulate_{halt,wbinvd}() and move the skip to to
>      kvm_emulate_{halt,wbinvd,hypercall}()
>
> The alternative is to remove kvm_x86_ops->skip_emulated_instruction()=
:
>   1. remove skip from kvm_emulate_cpuid() and modify callers
>   2. move kvm_complete_insn_gp to a header file and use
>      skip_emulated_instruction directly
>   3. remove unused kvm_x86_ops->skip_emulated_instruction()
>
> Which one do you prefer?
I prefer renaming them,  ie kvm_emulate_wbinvd_noskip(), and making the=
=20
existing ones, ie kvm_emulate_wbinvd() call the noskip verion and add a=
=20
skip similar to how wbinvd_interception above does.  I can send out a=20
patch later today with that rework.