Gleb Natapov wrote:
static unsigned int apic_lvt_mask[APIC_LVT_NUM] = {
LVT_MASK | APIC_LVT_TIMER_PERIODIC, /* LVTT */
LVT_MASK | APIC_MODE_MASK, /* LVTTHMR */
@@ -251,7 +257,12 @@ int kvm_apic_match_physical_addr(struct kvm_lapic *apic,
u16 dest)
int kvm_apic_match_logical_addr(struct kvm_lapic *apic, u8 mda)
{
int result = 0;
- u8 logical_id;
+ u32 logical_id;
+
+ if (apic_x2apic_mode(apic)) {
+ logical_id = apic_get_reg(apic, APIC_LDR);
+ return !!(logical_id & (uint16_t)mda & 0xffff);
+ }
!! unnecessary. And one of the (cast) and (& 0xffff) is unnecessary.
logical_id = GET_APIC_LOGICAL_ID(apic_get_reg(apic, APIC_LDR));
@@ -440,7 +451,8 @@ static void apic_send_ipi(struct kvm_lapic *apic)
irq.level = icr_low & APIC_INT_ASSERT;
irq.trig_mode = icr_low & APIC_INT_LEVELTRIG;
irq.shorthand = icr_low & APIC_SHORT_MASK;
- irq.dest_id = GET_APIC_DEST_FIELD(icr_high);
+ irq.dest_id = apic_x2apic_mode(apic) ? icr_high :
+ GET_APIC_DEST_FIELD(icr_high);
Please replace the ?: (here and elsewhere) with explicit if statements.
?: is unreadable when split over two lines like this.
(I find it more readable to do
blah = predicate
? iftrue
: iffalse;
but that's almost the same as an if)
-static void apic_mmio_read(struct kvm_io_device *this,
- gpa_t address, int len, void *data)
+static int apic_reg_read(struct kvm_lapic *apic, u32 offset, int len,
+ void *data)
{
- struct kvm_lapic *apic = (struct kvm_lapic *)this->private;
- unsigned int offset = address - apic->base_address;
unsigned char alignment = offset & 0xf;
u32 result;
+ static const uint64_t rmask = 0x43ff01ffffffe70c;
Wow. A comment perhaps?
if ((alignment + len) > 4) {
- printk(KERN_ERR "KVM_APIC_READ: alignment error %lx %d",
- (unsigned long)address, len);
- return;
+ printk(KERN_ERR "KVM_APIC_READ: alignment error %x %d\n",
+ offset, len);
+ return 1;
}
+
+ if (!(rmask & (1ULL << (offset >> 4)))) {
+ printk(KERN_ERR "KVM_APIC_READ: read reserved register %x\n",
+ offset);
+ return 1;
+ }
+
(offset >> 4) can still be 255, yielding unspecified results for the shift.
diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
index 98c2434..d3df59a 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
@@ -800,6 +800,8 @@ int kvm_set_msr_common(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u32 msr, u64
data)
case MSR_IA32_APICBASE:
kvm_set_apic_base(vcpu, data);
break;
+ case 0x800 ... 0xbff:
+ return kvm_x2apic_msr_write(vcpu, msr, data);
case MSR_IA32_MISC_ENABLE:
vcpu->arch.ia32_misc_enable_msr = data;
break;
@@ -958,6 +960,9 @@ int kvm_get_msr_common(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u32 msr, u64
*pdata)
case MSR_IA32_APICBASE:
data = kvm_get_apic_base(vcpu);
break;
+ case 0x800 ... 0xbff:
+ return kvm_x2apic_msr_read(vcpu, msr, pdata);
+ break;
case MSR_IA32_MISC_ENABLE:
data = vcpu->arch.ia32_misc_enable_msr;
break;
Whitespace...
--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
