On Wed, Nov 05, 2008 at 09:26:53AM -0800, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost at redhat.com> writes:
>
> > Finally implement the virt_disable function for kdump. It will call
> > kvm_x86_ops->crash_hardware_disable(), that will disable virtualization
> > extensions on the CPU if it is not disabled yet.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Eduardo Habkost <ehabkost at redhat.com>
> > ---
> > arch/x86/kvm/x86.c | 19 ++++++++++++++++++-
> > 1 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> > index 049c6a0..9e61baf 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> > @@ -40,6 +40,7 @@
> > #include <asm/msr.h>
> > #include <asm/desc.h>
> > #include <asm/mtrr.h>
> > +#include <asm/virtext.h>
> >
> > #define MAX_IO_MSRS 256
> > #define CR0_RESERVED_BITS \
> > @@ -2581,6 +2582,13 @@ int kvm_emulate_pio_string(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct
> > kvm_run *run, int in,
> > }
> > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kvm_emulate_pio_string);
> >
> > +/* Called at crash time, so we can disable virtualization if needed
> > + */
> > +static void crash_hardware_disable(void)
> > +{
> > + kvm_x86_ops->crash_hardware_disable(NULL);
> > +}
> > +
> > int kvm_arch_init(void *opaque)
> > {
> > int r;
> > @@ -2605,9 +2613,15 @@ int kvm_arch_init(void *opaque)
> >
> > kvm_x86_ops = ops;
> >
> > + r = set_virt_disable_func(crash_hardware_disable);
>
> Can we make this say:
> set_virt_disable_func(kvm_x86_ops->crash_hardware_disable);
>
> So we can avoid going through 2 levels of function pointers?
> I find that a little scary in code that might be running
> at the edge of stack overflow.
When I've checked this (on x86_64), gcc did tail recursion optimization
and the call was just a jump to the function, so stack usage shouldn't
be a problem.
But I am inclined to agree with you about the excess of abstraction.
--
Eduardo
