[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1f538be1-b5f1-d095-01be-38a30db62045@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2016 13:42:05 +0100
From: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
To: Brijesh Singh <brijesh.singh@....com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org
Cc: thomas.lendacky@....com, rkrcmar@...hat.com, joro@...tes.org,
x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...hat.com,
hpa@...or.com, pbonzini@...hat.com, tglx@...utronix.de, bp@...e.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] kvm: svm: Use the hardware provided GPA instead of
page walk
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> @@ -4420,6 +4420,21 @@ int kvm_write_guest_virt_system(struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt,
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kvm_write_guest_virt_system);
>
> +static int vcpu_is_mmio_gpa(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, unsigned long gva,
> + gpa_t gpa, bool write)
> +{
> + /* For APIC access vmexit */
> + if ((gpa & PAGE_MASK) == APIC_DEFAULT_PHYS_BASE)
> + return 1;
> +
> + if (vcpu_match_mmio_gpa(vcpu, gpa)) {
> + trace_vcpu_match_mmio(gva, gpa, write, true);
> + return 1;
> + }
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
I think I'd prefer that in a separate patch. But I don't have any
strong feelings about this.
> +
> static int vcpu_mmio_gva_to_gpa(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, unsigned long gva,
> gpa_t *gpa, struct x86_exception *exception,
> bool write)
> @@ -4446,16 +4461,7 @@ static int vcpu_mmio_gva_to_gpa(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, unsigned long gva,
> if (*gpa == UNMAPPED_GVA)
> return -1;
>
> - /* For APIC access vmexit */
> - if ((*gpa & PAGE_MASK) == APIC_DEFAULT_PHYS_BASE)
> - return 1;
> -
> - if (vcpu_match_mmio_gpa(vcpu, *gpa)) {
> - trace_vcpu_match_mmio(gva, *gpa, write, true);
> - return 1;
> - }
> -
> - return 0;
> + return vcpu_is_mmio_gpa(vcpu, gva, *gpa, write);
> }
>
> int emulator_write_phys(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, gpa_t gpa,
> @@ -4552,6 +4558,22 @@ static int emulator_read_write_onepage(unsigned long addr, void *val,
> int handled, ret;
> bool write = ops->write;
> struct kvm_mmio_fragment *frag;
> + struct x86_emulate_ctxt *ctxt = &vcpu->arch.emulate_ctxt;
> +
> + /*
> + * If the exit was due to a NPF we may already have a GPA.
> + * If the GPA is present, use it to avoid the GVA to GPA table walk.
> + * Note, this cannot be used on string operations since string
> + * operation using rep will only have the initial GPA from the NPF
> + * occurred.
> + */
I was wondering if it would make sense to get rid of gpa_available and
rather define a new function:
bool exception_gpa_valid(struct kvm_vcpu)
{
// check if svm
// check if exit code is NPF
// check ctxt
}
Then you could move the whole comment into that function.
Looks good to me in general.
--
David
Powered by blists - more mailing lists