[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [PATCH v3 01/12] x86/xstate: Create map/unmap primitives for xsave areas
Hi, On Mon Jan 27, 2025 at 10:44 AM GMT, Jan Beulich wrote: > On 10.01.2025 14:28, Alejandro Vallejo wrote: > > Add infrastructure to simplify ASI handling. With ASI in the picture > > we'll have several different means of accessing the XSAVE area of a > > given vCPU, depending on whether a domain is covered by ASI or not and > > whether the vCPU is question is scheduled on the current pCPU or not. > > > > Having these complexities exposed at the call sites becomes unwieldy > > very fast. These wrappers are intended to be used in a similar way to > > map_domain_page() and unmap_domain_page(); The map operation will > > dispatch the appropriate pointer for each case in a future patch, while > > unmap will remain a no-op where no unmap is required (e.g: when there's > > no ASI) and remove the transient maping if one was required. > > > > Follow-up patches replace all uses of raw v->arch.xsave_area by this > > mechanism in preparation to add the beforementioned dispatch logic to be > > added at a later time. > > > > Signed-off-by: Alejandro Vallejo <alejandro.vallejo@xxxxxxxxx> > > Acked-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx> > with one nit below. > > > --- a/xen/arch/x86/include/asm/xstate.h > > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/include/asm/xstate.h > > @@ -143,4 +143,46 @@ static inline bool xstate_all(const struct vcpu *v) > > (v->arch.xcr0_accum & XSTATE_LAZY & ~XSTATE_FP_SSE); > > } > > > > +/* > > + * Fetch a pointer to a vCPU's XSAVE area > > + * > > + * TL;DR: If v == current, the mapping is guaranteed to already exist. > > + * > > + * Despite the name, this macro might not actually map anything. The only > > case > > + * in which a mutation of page tables is strictly required is when ASI==on > > && > > + * v!=current. For everything else the mapping already exists and needs not > > + * be created nor destroyed. > > + * > > + * +-----------------+--------------+ > > + * | v == current | v != current | > > + * +--------------+-----------------+--------------+ > > + * | ASI enabled | per-vCPU fixmap | actual map | > > + * +--------------+-----------------+--------------+ > > + * | ASI disabled | directmap | > > + * +--------------+--------------------------------+ > > + * > > + * There MUST NOT be outstanding maps of XSAVE areas of the non-current > > vCPU > > + * at the point of context switch. Otherwise, the unmap operation will > > + * misbehave. > > + * > > + * TODO: Expand the macro to the ASI cases after infra to do so is in > > place. > > + * > > + * @param v Owner of the XSAVE area > > + */ > > +#define VCPU_MAP_XSAVE_AREA(v) ((v)->arch.xsave_area) > > + > > +/* > > + * Drops the mapping of a vCPU's XSAVE area and nullifies its pointer on > > exit > > + * > > + * See VCPU_MAP_XSAVE_AREA() for additional information on the persistence > > of > > + * these mappings. This macro only tears down the mappings in the ASI=on && > > + * v!=current case. > > + * > > + * TODO: Expand the macro to the ASI cases after infra to do so is in > > place. > > + * > > + * @param v Owner of the XSAVE area > > + * @param x XSAVE blob of v > > + */ > > + #define VCPU_UNMAP_XSAVE_AREA(v, x) do { (void)(v); (x) = NULL; } while(0) > > The "while" still wants to conform to style, despite it being a kind of > degenerate form. The overwhelming majority of instances we've got have at > least a blank before the opening parenthesis. Many also have the ones > inside. > > Jan Sure, makes sense. I'll adjust it. Cheers Alejandro
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |