On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 04:40:31PM +0000, Dave Martin wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 02, 2018 at 09:05:36AM +0100, Christoffer Dall wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 28, 2018 at 02:39:09PM +0100, Dave Martin wrote:
> > > In preparation for adding support for SVE in guests on arm64, a
> > > hook is needed for freeing additional per-vcpu memory when a vcpu
> > > is freed.
> >
> > Can this commit motivate why we can't do the work in kvm_arch_vcpu_free,
> > which we use for freeing other data structures?
> >
> > (Presumably, uninit is needed when you need to do something at the very
> > last step after releasing the struct pid.
>
> It wasn't to do with that.
>
> Rather, the division of responsibility between the vcpu_uninit and
> vcpu_free paths is not very clear.
>
> In the earlier version of the series, I think SVE state may have been
> allocated rather early and we may have needed to free it in the failure
> path of kvm_arch_vcpu_create() (which just calls kvm_vcpu_uninit()).
> (Alternatively, I may just have been wrong.)
>
> Now, the vcpu must be fully created before the KVM_ARM_SVE_CONFIG ioctl
> on it (which is what allocates sve_state) can succeed anyway.
>
> So the distinction between these two teardown phases is probably no
> longer important.
>
> I'll see whether I can get rid of this hook and free the SVE state in
> kvm_arch_vcpu_free() instead.
>
> Does that make sense?
>
Yes, thanks.
Christoffer
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
