On Tuesday 25 March 2008, Carsten Otte wrote:
> +
> +static inline void __user *__guestaddr_to_user(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
> + u64 guestaddr)
> +{
> + u64 prefix = vcpu->arch.sie_block->prefix;
> + u64 origin = vcpu->kvm->arch.guest_origin;
> + u64 memsize = vcpu->kvm->arch.guest_memsize;
> +
> + if (guestaddr < 2 * PAGE_SIZE)
> + guestaddr += prefix;
> + else if ((guestaddr >= prefix) && (guestaddr < prefix + 2 * PAGE_SIZE))
> + guestaddr -= prefix;
What happens if prefix is set to 4096? Does this do the right thing
according to the architecture definition?
> + if (guestaddr & 7)
> + BUG();
BUG_ON(guestaddr & 7);
same for the others.
> +static inline int copy_to_guest(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 guestdest,
> + const void *from, unsigned long n)
> +{
> + u64 prefix = vcpu->arch.sie_block->prefix;
> + u64 origin = vcpu->kvm->arch.guest_origin;
> + u64 memsize = vcpu->kvm->arch.guest_memsize;
> +
> + if ((guestdest < 2 * PAGE_SIZE) && (guestdest + n > 2 * PAGE_SIZE))
> + goto slowpath;
> +
> + if ((guestdest < prefix) && (guestdest + n > prefix))
> + goto slowpath;
> +
> + if ((guestdest < prefix + 2 * PAGE_SIZE)
> + && (guestdest + n > prefix + 2 * PAGE_SIZE))
> + goto slowpath;
> +
> + if (guestdest < 2 * PAGE_SIZE)
> + guestdest += prefix;
> + else if ((guestdest >= prefix) && (guestdest < prefix + 2 * PAGE_SIZE))
> + guestdest -= prefix;
> +
> + if (guestdest + n > memsize)
> + return -EFAULT;
> +
> + if (guestdest + n < guestdest)
> + return -EFAULT;
> +
> + guestdest += origin;
> +
> + return copy_to_user((void __user *) guestdest, from, n);
> +slowpath:
> + return __copy_to_guest_slow(vcpu, guestdest, from, n);
> +}
I assume that the call to copy_to_user is performance critical. Therefore, I'd
reorder the code to handle the common case inline:
extern inline int __copy_to_guest(u64 guestdest, const void *from, unsigned
long n,
unsigned long origin, unsigned long prefix);
static inline int copy_to_guest(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 guestdest,
const void *from, unsigned long n)
{
u64 prefix = vcpu->arch.sie_block->prefix;
u64 origin = vcpu->kvm->arch.guest_origin;
u64 memsize = vcpu->kvm->arch.guest_memsize;
if (n <= 0 || (guestdest + n > memsize))
return -EFAULT;
if (guestdest >= prefix + 2 * PAGE_SIZE) ||
((guestdest >= 2 * PAGE_SIZE) && (guestdest + n < prefix)))
/* no translation needed */
return copy_to_user((void __user *) guestdest + origin, from,
n);
else
/* target needs to be translated */
return __copy_to_guest(guestdest, from, n, origin, prefix);
This should make the inline version shorter and faster and keep most
of the interesting bits out-of-line.
> + try_module_get(THIS_MODULE);
Shouldn't you check the return value of this?
> +static int __guestcopy(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 guestdest, const void
> *from,
> + unsigned long n, int prefix)
> +{
> + if (prefix)
> + return copy_to_guest(vcpu, guestdest, from, n);
> + else
> + return copy_to_guest_absolute(vcpu, guestdest, from, n);
> +}
If you pass the vcpu->prefix or 0 in the prefix argument, you can always
call __copy_to_guest() directly.
> Index: linux-host/arch/s390/kvm/sie64a.S
> ===================================================================
> --- /dev/null
> +++ linux-host/arch/s390/kvm/sie64a.S
> @@ -0,0 +1,47 @@
> +/*
> + * sie64a.S - low level sie call
> + *
> + * Copyright IBM Corp. 2008
I would guess that this file has some bits in it that are older than
2008. How about
Copyright IBM Corp. 2004-2008
> +
> +SP_R5 = 5 * 8 # offset into stackframe
> +SP_R6 = 6 * 8
> +
> +/*
> + * sie64a calling convention:
> + * %r2 pointer to sie control block
> + * %r3 guest register save area
> + */
> + .globl sie64a
> +sie64a:
> + lgr %r5,%r3
> + stmg %r5,%r14,SP_R5(%r15) # save register on entry
> + lgr %r14,%r2 # pointer to sie control block
> + lmg %r0,%r13,0(%r3) # load guest gprs 0-13
> +sie_inst:
> + sie 0(%r14)
> + lg %r14,SP_R5(%r15)
> + stmg %r0,%r13,0(%r14) # save guest gprs 0-13
> + lghi %r2,0
> + lmg %r6,%r14,SP_R6(%r15)
> + br %r14
> +
> +sie_err:
> + lg %r14,SP_R5(%r15)
> + stmg %r0,%r13,0(%r14) # save guest gprs 0-13
> + lghi %r2,-EFAULT
> + lmg %r6,%r14,SP_R6(%r15)
> + br %r14
> +
> + .section __ex_table,"a"
> + .quad sie_inst,sie_err
> + .previous
EFAULT looks a bit too specific here, maybe EINVAL would be better?
> +/* for KVM_GET_REGS and KVM_SET_REGS */
> +struct kvm_regs {
> + /* general purpose regs for s390 */
> + __u64 gprs[16];
> +};
> +
> +/* for KVM_GET_SREGS and KVM_SET_SREGS */
> +struct kvm_sregs {
> + __u32 acrs[16];
> + __u64 crs[16];
> +};
Shouldn't that contain the PSW as well? Or is the PSW part of the
16 CRS?
> +/* for KVM_GET_FPU and KVM_SET_FPU */
> +struct kvm_fpu {
> + __u32 fpc;
> + __u64 fprs[16];
> +};
What about decimal floating point, does that use the same registers?
Arnd <><
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace
_______________________________________________
kvm-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kvm-devel
