[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230516102912.GG2587705@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Tue, 16 May 2023 12:29:12 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Tianyu Lan <ltykernel@...il.com>
Cc: luto@...nel.org, tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com,
bp@...en8.de, dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, x86@...nel.org,
hpa@...or.com, seanjc@...gle.com, pbonzini@...hat.com,
jgross@...e.com, tiala@...rosoft.com, kirill@...temov.name,
jiangshan.ljs@...group.com, ashish.kalra@....com,
srutherford@...gle.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
anshuman.khandual@....com, pawan.kumar.gupta@...ux.intel.com,
adrian.hunter@...el.com, daniel.sneddon@...ux.intel.com,
alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com, sandipan.das@....com,
ray.huang@....com, brijesh.singh@....com, michael.roth@....com,
thomas.lendacky@....com, venu.busireddy@...cle.com,
sterritt@...gle.com, tony.luck@...el.com, samitolvanen@...gle.com,
fenghua.yu@...el.com, pangupta@....com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-hyperv@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH V6 08/14] x86/hyperv: Use vmmcall to implement
Hyper-V hypercall in sev-snp enlightened guest
On Mon, May 15, 2023 at 12:59:10PM -0400, Tianyu Lan wrote:
> From: Tianyu Lan <tiala@...rosoft.com>
>
> In sev-snp enlightened guest, Hyper-V hypercall needs
> to use vmmcall to trigger vmexit and notify hypervisor
> to handle hypercall request.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tianyu Lan <tiala@...rosoft.com>
> ---
> Change since RFC V2:
> * Fix indentation style
> ---
> arch/x86/include/asm/mshyperv.h | 44 ++++++++++++++++++++++++---------
> 1 file changed, 33 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/mshyperv.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/mshyperv.h
> index 97d117ec95c4..939373791249 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/mshyperv.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/mshyperv.h
> @@ -61,16 +61,25 @@ static inline u64 hv_do_hypercall(u64 control, void *input, void *output)
> u64 hv_status;
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_X86_64
> - if (!hv_hypercall_pg)
> - return U64_MAX;
> + if (hv_isolation_type_en_snp()) {
> + __asm__ __volatile__("mov %4, %%r8\n"
> + "vmmcall"
> + : "=a" (hv_status), ASM_CALL_CONSTRAINT,
> + "+c" (control), "+d" (input_address)
> + : "r" (output_address)
> + : "cc", "memory", "r8", "r9", "r10", "r11");
> + } else {
> + if (!hv_hypercall_pg)
> + return U64_MAX;
>
> - __asm__ __volatile__("mov %4, %%r8\n"
> - CALL_NOSPEC
> - : "=a" (hv_status), ASM_CALL_CONSTRAINT,
> - "+c" (control), "+d" (input_address)
> - : "r" (output_address),
> - THUNK_TARGET(hv_hypercall_pg)
> - : "cc", "memory", "r8", "r9", "r10", "r11");
> + __asm__ __volatile__("mov %4, %%r8\n"
> + CALL_NOSPEC
> + : "=a" (hv_status), ASM_CALL_CONSTRAINT,
> + "+c" (control), "+d" (input_address)
> + : "r" (output_address),
> + THUNK_TARGET(hv_hypercall_pg)
> + : "cc", "memory", "r8", "r9", "r10", "r11");
> + }
Wouldn't this generate better code with an alternative?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists