[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1711172350130.2186@nanos>
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2017 23:57:59 +0100 (CET)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@...mens.com>
cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
x86@...nel.org,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
jailhouse-dev@...glegroups.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/10] x86: jailhouse: Avoid access of unsupported platform
resources
On Thu, 16 Nov 2017, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> From: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@...mens.com>
>
> We don't have CMOS access, thus we can't set the warm-reset vectors in
s/We/A jailhouse cell/ or s/We/A jailhouse guest/
> do_boot_cpu. There is no RTC, thus also no wall clock. Furthermore,
> there are no ISA IRQs and no PIC. So fill the platform callbacks
> accordingly.
> +static void jailhouse_get_wallclock(struct timespec *now)
> +{
> + memset(now, 0, sizeof(*now));
> +}
> @@ -1006,7 +1007,8 @@ static int do_boot_cpu(int apicid, int cpu, struct task_struct *idle,
> * the targeted processor.
> */
>
> - if (get_uv_system_type() != UV_NON_UNIQUE_APIC) {
> + if (get_uv_system_type() != UV_NON_UNIQUE_APIC &&
> + !jailhouse_paravirt()) {
>
> pr_debug("Setting warm reset code and vector.\n");
Adding more here might justify a function pointer in x86_platform_ops. Not
sure though, but we have an increasing amount of xen()/kvm()/whatever
conditionals popping up all over the place. And now you add jailhouse()
ones :)
Thanks,
tglx
Powered by blists - more mailing lists