[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <832ccdcd6b199f45b64fc10a70b9b7962071badd.camel@suse.com>
Date: Fri, 21 May 2021 09:13:31 +0200
From: Dario Faggioli <dfaggioli@...e.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Stefano De Venuto <stefano.devenuto99@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: pbonzini@...hat.com, seanjc@...gle.com, vkuznets@...hat.com,
wanpengli@...cent.com, jmattson@...gle.com, x86@...nel.org,
hpa@...or.com, kvm@...r.kernel.org, rostedt@...dmis.org,
y.karadz@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Move VMEnter and VMExit tracepoints closer to the
actual event
Hi Thomas,
And thanks a lot for the review!
On Thu, 2021-05-20 at 09:21 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Wed, May 19 2021 at 20:23, Stefano De Venuto wrote:
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm.c b/arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm.c
> > index 05eca131eaf2..c77d4866e239 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/svm/svm.c
> > @@ -3707,6 +3705,8 @@ static noinstr void
> > svm_vcpu_enter_exit(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> >
> > kvm_guest_enter_irqoff();
> >
> > + trace_kvm_entry(vcpu);
>
> No. This violates the noinstr rules and will make objtool complain on
> a
> full validation run.
>
Ok, I see, sorry for not noticing it.
Well, in this specific case --considering others' reviews-- it seems
that the tracepoints will be moved to somewhere else anyway, but we'll
make sure to run all the proper validation steps next time.
Thanks again and Regards
--
Dario Faggioli, Ph.D
http://about.me/dario.faggioli
Virtualization Software Engineer
SUSE Labs, SUSE https://www.suse.com/
-------------------------------------------------------------------
<<This happens because _I_ choose it to happen!>> (Raistlin Majere)
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (834 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists