On 03.06.2024 13:26, Sergiy Kibrik wrote: > From: Xenia Ragiadakou <burzalod...@gmail.com> > > Replace cpu_has_svm check with using_svm, so that not only SVM support in CPU > gets checked, but also presence of functions svm_load_segs() and > svm_load_segs_prefetch() in the build checked as well. > > Since SVM depends on HVM, it can be used alone. > > Signed-off-by: Xenia Ragiadakou <burzalod...@gmail.com> > Signed-off-by: Sergiy Kibrik <sergiy_kib...@epam.com>
The code you're touching is solely for PV, even if it's interacting with HVM code. Therefore "x86/PV:" may be the better subject prefix. > --- a/xen/arch/x86/domain.c > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/domain.c > @@ -1731,11 +1731,9 @@ static void load_segments(struct vcpu *n) > if ( !(n->arch.flags & TF_kernel_mode) ) > SWAP(gsb, gss); > > -#ifdef CONFIG_HVM > - if ( cpu_has_svm && (uregs->fs | uregs->gs) <= 3 ) > + if ( using_svm && (uregs->fs | uregs->gs) <= 3 ) > fs_gs_done = svm_load_segs(n->arch.pv.ldt_ents, > LDT_VIRT_START(n), > n->arch.pv.fs_base, gsb, gss); > -#endif > } > > if ( !fs_gs_done ) > @@ -2048,9 +2046,9 @@ static void __context_switch(void) > > write_ptbase(n); > > -#if defined(CONFIG_PV) && defined(CONFIG_HVM) > +#if defined(CONFIG_PV) In such a case, would you mind switching (back) to the shorter "#ifdef" form? Then Acked-by: Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com> Jan > /* Prefetch the VMCB if we expect to use it later in the context switch > */ > - if ( cpu_has_svm && is_pv_64bit_domain(nd) && !is_idle_domain(nd) ) > + if ( using_svm && is_pv_64bit_domain(nd) && !is_idle_domain(nd) ) > svm_load_segs_prefetch(); > #endif >
