[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CALCETrV01xm5TPngvU1TZzhx3+Ht7eRrkOV5b3tmgU81f_o5Ug@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2015 22:22:44 -0700
From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
Cc: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
kvm list <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Paul McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] x86: context_tracking: avoid irq_save/irq_restore on
kernel entry and exit
On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 6:39 PM, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com> wrote:
> x86 always calls user_enter and user_exit with interrupt disabled.
> Therefore, it is not necessary to check for exceptions, nor to
> save/restore the IRQ state, when context tracking functions are
> called by guest_enter and guest_exit.
>
> Use the previously introduced __context_tracking_entry and
> __context_tracking_exit.
x86 isn't ready for this yet. We could do a quick-and-dirty fix with
explicit IRQs-on-and-off much protected by the static key, or we could
just wait until I finish the syscall cleanup. I favor the latter, but
you're all welcome to do the former and I'll review it.
BTW, Frederic, I have a static key patch coming that I think you'll
like. I'll send it tomorrow once I'm in front of a real computer.
--Andy
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists