|
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v1] x86/msr: add Raw and Host domain policies
On Thu, 2018-02-15 at 06:33 -0700, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > > > On 08.02.18 at 11:23, <sergey.dyasli@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > --- a/xen/arch/x86/cpu/common.c
> > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/cpu/common.c
> > @@ -118,9 +118,18 @@ void (* __read_mostly ctxt_switch_masking)(const
> > struct vcpu *next);
> >
> > bool __init probe_cpuid_faulting(void)
> > {
> > + struct msr_domain_policy *dp = &raw_msr_domain_policy;
>
> Unless you foresee the variable to be needed for further things
> here, could this be moved into the more narrow scope it's used in
> please?
Will do in v2.
> > uint64_t val;
> > + int rc;
> >
> > - if (rdmsr_safe(MSR_INTEL_PLATFORM_INFO, val) ||
> > + if ((rc = rdmsr_safe(MSR_INTEL_PLATFORM_INFO, val)) == 0)
> > + {
> > + dp->plaform_info.available = true;
> > + if (val & MSR_PLATFORM_INFO_CPUID_FAULTING)
> > + dp->plaform_info.cpuid_faulting = true;
> > + }
> > +
> > + if (rc ||
> > !(val & MSR_PLATFORM_INFO_CPUID_FAULTING) ||
> > rdmsr_safe(MSR_INTEL_MISC_FEATURES_ENABLES,
> > this_cpu(msr_misc_features)))
>
> Below here we have
>
> setup_clear_cpu_cap(X86_FEATURE_CPUID_FAULTING);
>
> Shouldn't this be reflected in the host policy?
I guess the correct thing to do for now for host_msr_domain_policy is:
dp->plaform_info.cpuid_faulting = cpu_has_cpuid_faulting;
Looking at the code, calculate_pv_max_policy() will be simplified with
the above change: pv_max_msr_domain_policy will become a copy of host
policy.
This actually brings a question: what to do about per-pCPU MSRs in the
context of MSR policy?
--
Thanks,
Sergey
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
|
![]() |
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |