On Fri, Dec 28, 2018 at 12:39:31PM +0000, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> This reduces the complexity of init_amd(), and collects related
> workarounds together.
>
> It also offers us the opportunity to stop performing workarounds when
> virtualised - doing so is wasteful, as it all involves poking MSRs which
> no hypervisor will let us touch in practice.
>
> As amd.c has diverged almost entirely from its Linux heratage, start
> switching it to using Xen hypervisor style.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.coop...@citrix.com>
> ---
> CC: Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com>
> CC: Wei Liu <wei.l...@citrix.com>
> CC: Roger Pau Monné <roger....@citrix.com>
>
> I've dropped various printk()s about working around some errata, because
> their use was completely inconsistent. They want to be uniform, whether
> that is missing or present.
> ---
> xen/arch/x86/cpu/amd.c | 266
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------------
> 1 file changed, 153 insertions(+), 113 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/cpu/amd.c b/xen/arch/x86/cpu/amd.c
> index c790416..c3aa1f4 100644
> --- a/xen/arch/x86/cpu/amd.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/cpu/amd.c
> @@ -534,22 +534,165 @@ static void early_init_amd(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
> ctxt_switch_levelling(NULL);
> }
>
> +static void init_amd_k8(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
> +{
> + uint64_t val;
> +
> + /*
> + * Skip errata workarounds if we are virtualised. We won't have
> + * sufficient control of hardware to do anything useful.
> + */
> + if ( !cpu_has_hypervisor )
I think you want `if ( cpu_has_hypervisor ) return;` according to the
comment (here and below).
The rest LGTM, as is mostly code movement AFAICT:
Reviewed-by: Roger Pau Monné <roger....@citrix.com>
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
