linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/3] KVM: implement spinlock optimization logic for arm/s390

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <c3db20bd-aa38-f0d1-30d3-dbcbe85e2688@redhat.com>
Date:   Mon, 7 Aug 2017 10:52:07 +0200
From:   David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
To:     "Longpeng(Mike)" <longpeng2@...wei.com>, pbonzini@...hat.com,
        rkrcmar@...hat.com
Cc:     agraf@...e.com, borntraeger@...ibm.com, cohuck@...hat.com,
        christoffer.dall@...aro.org, marc.zyngier@....com,
        james.hogan@...tec.com, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, weidong.huang@...wei.com,
        arei.gonglei@...wei.com, wangxinxin.wang@...wei.com,
        longpeng.mike@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] KVM: implement spinlock optimization logic for
 arm/s390

On 07.08.2017 10:44, Longpeng(Mike) wrote:
> Implements the kvm_arch_vcpu_spin/preempt_in_kernel() for arm/s390,
> they needn't cache the result.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Longpeng(Mike) <longpeng2@...wei.com>
> ---
>  arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c | 4 ++--
>  virt/kvm/arm/arm.c       | 4 ++--
>  2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
> index f78cdc2..49b9178 100644
> --- a/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
> +++ b/arch/s390/kvm/kvm-s390.c
> @@ -2449,12 +2449,12 @@ int kvm_arch_vcpu_runnable(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>  
>  bool kvm_arch_vcpu_spin_in_kernel(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>  {
> -	return false;
> +	return !(vcpu->arch.sie_block->gpsw.mask & PSW_MASK_PSTATE);
>  }
>  
>  bool kvm_arch_vcpu_preempt_in_kernel(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>  {
> -	return false;
> +	return !(vcpu->arch.sie_block->gpsw.mask & PSW_MASK_PSTATE);
>  }
>  
>  void kvm_s390_vcpu_block(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/arm.c b/virt/kvm/arm/arm.c
> index e45f780..956f025 100644
> --- a/virt/kvm/arm/arm.c
> +++ b/virt/kvm/arm/arm.c
> @@ -418,12 +418,12 @@ int kvm_arch_vcpu_runnable(struct kvm_vcpu *v)
>  
>  bool kvm_arch_vcpu_spin_in_kernel(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>  {
> -	return false;
> +	return vcpu_mode_priv(vcpu);
>  }
>  
>  bool kvm_arch_vcpu_preempt_in_kernel(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>  {
> -	return false;
> +	return vcpu_mode_priv(vcpu);
>  }
>  
>  /* Just ensure a guest exit from a particular CPU */
> 

Can you split that into two parts? (arm and s390x?)

-- 

Thanks,

David