linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 09/11] x86/paravirt: move the Xen-only pv_irq_ops under the PARAVIRT

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: <4477edae-e7c0-dcad-0621-824d55e97eaf@suse.com>
Date:   Fri, 24 Aug 2018 16:13:43 +0200
From:   Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org,
        x86@...nel.org, virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
        akataria@...are.com, rusty@...tcorp.com.au,
        boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com, hpa@...or.com, tglx@...utronix.de,
        mingo@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 09/11] x86/paravirt: move the Xen-only pv_irq_ops under
 the PARAVIRT_XXL umbrella

On 24/08/18 16:10, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 13, 2018 at 09:37:37AM +0200, Juergen Gross wrote:
>> Some of the paravirt ops defined in pv_irq_ops are for Xen PV guests
>> only. Define them only if CONFIG_PARAVIRT_XXL is set.
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/paravirt_types.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/paravirt_types.h
>> index e652ec27d945..ae53ee36d8fb 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/paravirt_types.h
>> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/paravirt_types.h
>> @@ -197,8 +197,10 @@ struct pv_irq_ops {
>>  	struct paravirt_callee_save irq_disable;
>>  	struct paravirt_callee_save irq_enable;
>>  
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_PARAVIRT_XXL
>>  	void (*safe_halt)(void);
>>  	void (*halt)(void);
>> +#endif
> 
> that makes me sad... but it appears VSMP also uses them. Can't you
> simply make VSMP also select XXL, I don't think that's used quite as
> much as Xen is :-)
> 

Sure, why not?

Any objections?


Juergen