From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 13/19] x86/VPMU: Handle PMU interrupts
	for PV guests
Date: Thu, 22 May 2014 13:25:26 -0400
Message-ID: <537E3306.2020009@oracle.com>
References: <1399996413-1998-1-git-send-email-boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>
	<1399996413-1998-14-git-send-email-boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>
	<537E344B02000078000150B2@mail.emea.novell.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
In-Reply-To: <537E344B02000078000150B2@mail.emea.novell.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>
Cc: kevin.tian@intel.com, keir@xen.org, suravee.suthikulpanit@amd.com, andrew.cooper3@citrix.com, donald.d.dugger@intel.com, xen-devel@lists.xen.org, dietmar.hahn@ts.fujitsu.com, jun.nakajima@intel.com
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On 05/22/2014 11:30 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>
>> @@ -99,14 +120,87 @@ int vpmu_do_rdmsr(unsigned int msr, uint64_t *msr_content)
>>           return 0;
>>   
>>       if ( vpmu->arch_vpmu_ops && vpmu->arch_vpmu_ops->do_rdmsr )
>> -        return vpmu->arch_vpmu_ops->do_rdmsr(msr, msr_content);
>> +    {
>> +        int ret = vpmu->arch_vpmu_ops->do_rdmsr(msr, msr_content);
>> +
>> +        if ( !is_hvm_domain(current->domain) &&
>> +            (current->arch.vpmu.xenpmu_data->pmu_flags & PMU_CACHED) )
> Wouldn't the same comment as in WRMSR handling apply here too?
> If so, either replicate it or add a brief comment referring to the
> other one.


Yes, the comment is applicable here too and the next patch merges the 
two routines.


>> +        /* Store appropriate registers in xenpmu_data */
>> +        if ( is_pv_32bit_domain(current->domain) )
>> +        {
>> +            /*
>> +             * 32-bit dom0 cannot process Xen's addresses (which are 64 bit)
>> +             * and therefore we treat it the same way as a non-priviledged
>> +             * PV 32-bit domain.
>> +             */
>> +            struct compat_cpu_user_regs *cmp;
>> +
>> +            gregs = guest_cpu_user_regs();
>> +
>> +            cmp = (void *)&v->arch.vpmu.xenpmu_data->pmu.r.regs;
>> +            XLAT_cpu_user_regs(cmp, gregs);
>> +            memcpy(&v->arch.vpmu.xenpmu_data->pmu.r.regs,
>> +                   &cmp, sizeof(struct compat_cpu_user_regs));
> Afaict this memcpy() does nothing (src == dst).

Yes, memcpy is unnecessary here, copying is already done by the 
preceeding XLAT_cpu_user_reg().


-boris