[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <9f8cc440-82f0-d6d8-945d-19c48f69a6b0@citrix.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2020 00:24:06 +0100
From: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@...rix.com>
To: Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>,
Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>,
<xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org>, <x86@...nel.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
CC: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@...nel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] x86/xen: remove 32-bit Xen PV guest support
On 02/07/2020 23:59, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
> On 7/1/20 7:06 AM, Juergen Gross wrote:
>>
>> -#ifdef CONFIG_X86_PAE
>> -static void xen_set_pte_atomic(pte_t *ptep, pte_t pte)
>> -{
>> - trace_xen_mmu_set_pte_atomic(ptep, pte);
>> - __xen_set_pte(ptep, pte);
>
> Probably not for this series but I wonder whether __xen_set_pte() should
> continue to use hypercall now that we are 64-bit only.
The hypercall path is a SYSCALL (and SYSRET out).
The "writeable" PTE path is a #PF, followed by an x86 instruction
emulation, which then reaches the same logic as the hypercall path (and
an IRET out).
~Andrew
Powered by blists - more mailing lists