Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 0/3 v2] XSAVE/XRSTOR fixes and enhancements

[Keir Fraser <keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 31/08/2010 15:52, "Han, Weidong" <weidong.han@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Change logs from v1 -> v2:
> Due to not guarantee backward compatibility, drop the guest save/restore patch
> here. Will re-implement it later. In addition, split the original fix frozen
> states patch into XSAVE/XRSTOR cleanup patch and fix frozen state patch.
> 
> Patch 1/3: XSAVE/XRSTOR: some cleanups
> Replace xfeature_low and xfeature_high with a u64 variable xfeature_mask.
> In structure hvm_vcpu, rename xfeature_mask to xcr0
> Provide EDX:EAX with all bits set to 1 for XSAVE and XRSTOR as spec
> recommends.
> 
> Patch 2/3: Fix frozen states
> If a guest sets a state and dirties the state, but later temporarily clears
> the state, and at this time if this vcpu is scheduled out, then other vcpus
> may corrupt the state before the vcpu is scheduled in again, thus the state
> cannot be restored correctly. To solve this issue, this patch save/restore all
> states unconditionally on vcpu context switch.

Performance overhead of this fix? Is there no other lazy save technique that
can work?

> Patch 3/3. Enable guest AVX
> This patch enables Intel(R) Advanced Vector Extension (AVX) for guest.

If we enable this but don't implement save/restore then don't guests lose
state across s/r with unpredictable results?

 -- Keir



_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel