[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <56D6BEEF.3000208@arm.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2016 10:22:39 +0000
From: "Suzuki K. Poulose" <Suzuki.Poulose@....com>
To: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Cc: christoffer.dall@...aro.org, will.deacon@....com,
ynorov@...iumnetworks.com, catalin.marinas@....com,
mark.rutland@....com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
kvmarm@...ts.cs.columbia.edu
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 8/8] arm64: kvm: Check support for AArch32 for 32bit
guests
On 02/03/16 09:08, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On 25/02/16 09:52, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
>> I really wanted to pass kvm_vcpu down to the helpers. But then, I can't
>> define the arch specific helper in asm/kvm_host.h due to lack of kvm_vcpu's
>> definition yet:
>>
>> In file included from include/linux/kvm_host.h:35:0,
>> from arch/arm64/kernel/asm-offsets.c:24:
>> ./arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h: In function ‘kvm_arch_vcpu_validate_features’:
>> ./arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h:344:48: error: dereferencing pointer to incomplete type
>> return !test_bit(KVM_ARM_VCPU_EL1_32BIT, vcpu->arch.features) ||
>
> Why don't you just have the prototype in kvm_host.h, and move the actual
> implementation to something like guest.c? But I think there is a better
> approach, see below.
I thought it would better be a static inline. But, the GCC can do that, silly me :)
>
> This is really convoluted (it took me 5 minutes staring at the
> expression and remembering that AArch32 EL1 implies AArch32 EL0 to get it).
>
> Now, we already have kvm_reset_vcpu() that validates AArch32 support. It
> would probably be better to move things there. Thoughts?
Definitely. I overlooked the function name to do something
specific to resetting the CPU than doing some checks :(.
I will respin it.
Cheers
Suzuki
Powered by blists - more mailing lists