From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.0 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER, INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD125C433F5 for ; Mon, 20 Sep 2021 13:15:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F616610FB for ; Mon, 20 Sep 2021 13:15:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S239261AbhITNQt (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Sep 2021 09:16:49 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:39126 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S239247AbhITNQf (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Sep 2021 09:16:35 -0400 Received: from disco-boy.misterjones.org (disco-boy.misterjones.org [51.254.78.96]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EE49860FE6; Mon, 20 Sep 2021 13:15:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from sofa.misterjones.org ([185.219.108.64] helo=why.misterjones.org) by disco-boy.misterjones.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1mSJ8V-00BldR-0B; Mon, 20 Sep 2021 14:15:07 +0100 Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2021 14:15:06 +0100 Message-ID: <87pmt3v15x.wl-maz@kernel.org> From: Marc Zyngier To: Fuad Tabba Cc: kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, will@kernel.org, james.morse@arm.com, alexandru.elisei@arm.com, suzuki.poulose@arm.com, mark.rutland@arm.com, christoffer.dall@arm.com, pbonzini@redhat.com, drjones@redhat.com, oupton@google.com, qperret@google.com, kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kernel-team@android.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/8] KVM: arm64: Pass struct kvm to per-EC handlers In-Reply-To: <20210827101609.2808181-2-tabba@google.com> References: <20210827101609.2808181-1-tabba@google.com> <20210827101609.2808181-2-tabba@google.com> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) SEMI-EPG/1.14.7 (Harue) FLIM-LB/1.14.9 (=?UTF-8?B?R29qxY0=?=) APEL-LB/10.8 EasyPG/1.0.0 Emacs/27.1 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MULE/6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO) MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 185.219.108.64 X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: tabba@google.com, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, will@kernel.org, james.morse@arm.com, alexandru.elisei@arm.com, suzuki.poulose@arm.com, mark.rutland@arm.com, christoffer.dall@arm.com, pbonzini@redhat.com, drjones@redhat.com, oupton@google.com, qperret@google.com, kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kernel-team@android.com X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: maz@kernel.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on disco-boy.misterjones.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: kvm@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 27 Aug 2021 11:16:02 +0100, Fuad Tabba wrote: > > We need struct kvm to check for protected VMs to be able to pick > the right handlers for them. > > Mark the handler functions inline, since some handlers will be > called in future code from the protected VM handlers. > > Signed-off-by: Fuad Tabba > --- > arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/include/hyp/switch.h | 16 ++++++++-------- > arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/nvhe/switch.c | 2 +- > arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/vhe/switch.c | 2 +- > 3 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/include/hyp/switch.h b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/include/hyp/switch.h > index 0397606c0951..7cbff0ee59a5 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/include/hyp/switch.h > +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/include/hyp/switch.h > @@ -163,7 +163,7 @@ static inline void __hyp_sve_restore_guest(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) > * If FP/SIMD is not implemented, handle the trap and inject an undefined > * instruction exception to the guest. Similarly for trapped SVE accesses. > */ > -static bool kvm_hyp_handle_fpsimd(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 *exit_code) > +static inline bool kvm_hyp_handle_fpsimd(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 *exit_code) No, please don't do that. We already have function pointers for each of these, so by doing that you are forcing the compiler to emit the code *twice*. Instead, call into the relevant EC handler by using the base array that already does the non-protected handling. > { > bool sve_guest, sve_host; > u8 esr_ec; > @@ -318,7 +318,7 @@ static inline bool esr_is_ptrauth_trap(u32 esr) > > DECLARE_PER_CPU(struct kvm_cpu_context, kvm_hyp_ctxt); > > -static bool kvm_hyp_handle_ptrauth(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 *exit_code) > +static inline bool kvm_hyp_handle_ptrauth(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 *exit_code) > { > struct kvm_cpu_context *ctxt; > u64 val; > @@ -343,7 +343,7 @@ static bool kvm_hyp_handle_ptrauth(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 *exit_code) > return true; > } > > -static bool kvm_hyp_handle_sysreg(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 *exit_code) > +static inline bool kvm_hyp_handle_sysreg(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 *exit_code) > { > if (cpus_have_final_cap(ARM64_WORKAROUND_CAVIUM_TX2_219_TVM) && > handle_tx2_tvm(vcpu)) > @@ -356,7 +356,7 @@ static bool kvm_hyp_handle_sysreg(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 *exit_code) > return false; > } > > -static bool kvm_hyp_handle_cp15(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 *exit_code) > +static inline bool kvm_hyp_handle_cp15(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 *exit_code) > { > if (static_branch_unlikely(&vgic_v3_cpuif_trap) && > __vgic_v3_perform_cpuif_access(vcpu) == 1) > @@ -365,7 +365,7 @@ static bool kvm_hyp_handle_cp15(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 *exit_code) > return false; > } > > -static bool kvm_hyp_handle_iabt_low(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 *exit_code) > +static inline bool kvm_hyp_handle_iabt_low(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 *exit_code) > { > if (!__populate_fault_info(vcpu)) > return true; > @@ -373,7 +373,7 @@ static bool kvm_hyp_handle_iabt_low(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 *exit_code) > return false; > } > > -static bool kvm_hyp_handle_dabt_low(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 *exit_code) > +static inline bool kvm_hyp_handle_dabt_low(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 *exit_code) > { > if (!__populate_fault_info(vcpu)) > return true; > @@ -403,7 +403,7 @@ static bool kvm_hyp_handle_dabt_low(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 *exit_code) > > typedef bool (*exit_handler_fn)(struct kvm_vcpu *, u64 *); > > -static const exit_handler_fn *kvm_get_exit_handler_array(void); > +const exit_handler_fn *kvm_get_exit_handler_array(struct kvm *kvm); Why? What breaks if when this is static? There really shouldn't be anything else referencing this array. Thanks, M. -- Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.