[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v12 for-xen-4.5 12/20] x86/VPMU: Initialize PMU for PV(H) guests



On 09/29/2014 11:42 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 29.09.14 at 17:41, <boris.ostrovsky@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 09/29/2014 11:25 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 25.09.14 at 21:28, <boris.ostrovsky@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
@@ -389,14 +390,26 @@ static int amd_vpmu_initialise(struct vcpu *v)
         }
       }
- ctxt = xzalloc_bytes(sizeof(struct xen_pmu_amd_ctxt) +
-                         2 * sizeof(uint64_t) * AMD_MAX_COUNTERS);
-    if ( !ctxt )
+    regs_size = 2 * sizeof(uint64_t) * AMD_MAX_COUNTERS;
+    if ( is_hvm_domain(v->domain) )
       {
-        gdprintk(XENLOG_WARNING, "Insufficient memory for PMU, "
-            " PMU feature is unavailable on domain %d vcpu %d.\n",
-            v->vcpu_id, v->domain->domain_id);
-        return -ENOMEM;
+        ctxt = xzalloc_bytes(sizeof(struct xen_pmu_amd_ctxt) + regs_size);
+        if ( !ctxt )
+        {
+            gdprintk(XENLOG_WARNING, "Insufficient memory for PMU, "
+                "PMU feature is unavailable\n");
+            return -ENOMEM;
+        }
+    }
+    else
+    {
+        if ( sizeof(struct xen_pmu_data) + regs_size > PAGE_SIZE )
This is a compile time constant condition - no reason to issue a
message and return failure at runtime, just BUILD_BUG_ON() instead.
It will not be if I replace AMD_MAX_COUNTERS with runtime register
count, as you asked in an earlier comment.
For which case see the respective VMX side comment.

Not sure I understand what you mean here. it will be almost exactly the same.

-boris


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel


 


Rackspace

Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.