Re: [PATCH RFC] pvh: clearly specify used parameters in vcpu_guest_context

[Mukesh Rathor <mukesh.rathor@oracle.com>]

On Fri, 15 Nov 2013 13:56:54 -0800
Mukesh Rathor <mukesh.rathor@oracle.com> wrote:

> On Fri, 15 Nov 2013 16:45:47 +0000
> "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@suse.com> wrote:
> 
> > >>> On 15.11.13 at 17:40, George Dunlap
> > >>> <george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com> wrote:
> > > On 15/11/13 16:32, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > >>>>> On 15.11.13 at 16:50, Roger Pau Monne <roger.pau@citrix.com>
> > >>>>> wrote:
> > >>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/domain.c
> > >>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/domain.c
> > >>> @@ -704,9 +704,11 @@ int arch_set_info_guest(
> > >>>           /* PVH 32bitfixme */
> > >>>           ASSERT(!compat);
> > >>>   
> > >>> -        if ( c(ctrlreg[1]) || c(ldt_base) || c(ldt_ents) ||
> > >>> +        if ( c(ctrlreg[0]) || c(ctrlreg[1]) || c(ctrlreg[2]) ||
> > >>> +             c(ctrlreg[4]) || c(ldt_base) || c(ldt_ents) ||
> > >> I think it should actually be a bug for the guest to request an
> > >> all blank CR0 or CR4. Minimally CR0.PE, CR0.PG, and CR4.PAE
> > >> would seem to be a valid requirement to be set.
> > >>
> > >> Apart from that ctrlreg[] is an 8-element array... And I don't
> > >> see debugreg[] being verified at all.
> > >>
> > >>>                c(user_regs.cs) || c(user_regs.ss) ||
> > >>> c(user_regs.es) || c(user_regs.ds) || c(user_regs.fs) ||
> > >>> c(user_regs.gs) ||
> > >>> +             c(kernel_ss) || c(kernel_sp) ||
> > >>> c.nat->gs_base_kernel ||
> > >> So George and/or Mukesh found it necessary to set
> > >> gs_base_kernel, and you rip it out? I'm curious as to what
> > >> they're going to say...
> > > 
> > > I didn't find it necessary; I was mostly focused on merging the
> > > PVH and HVM codepaths without causing any regressions.  It's not
> > > obvious to me what's special about gs_base_kernel, and I haven't
> > > yet gone back to try to find out why Mukesh did it that way.
> 
> Hi,
> 
> We had talked about this while ago, but upon boot, the first thing
> a vcpu needs is access to kernel data structure. (A secondary vcpu
> is bootstrapped way up into the kernel). It would be possible to
> get rid of gs_base_kernel, but will take some work on the linux side. 
> I can try and test it out, and let you guys know.

Ok, looking at this more, I can hack cpu_bringup_and_idle() in
linux to include a static variable for cpuid, which is the least a
vcpu needs to know first thing. But, I think that would not work when
vcpu hotplug support is added. Another option would be to pass cpuid
in one of the registers, say rdi. Thus, rdi == cpuid will be passed
to VCPUOP_initialise. In bringup function, the booting vcpu can then
load it's own gs based on the cpuid. If linux folks, konrad (CCd), is OK
with this, we can remove gs_base_kernel.  Otherwise, it's such a small
thing, hopefually it can stay.

thanks,
Mukesh