Hi Fuad, On Mon, 23 Aug 2021 11:21:05 +0100, Fuad Tabba <tabba@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi Marc, > > On Thu, Aug 19, 2021 at 3:36 PM Marc Zyngier <maz@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > I realised that I wasn't very forthcoming here. I've decided to put > > the code where my mouth is and pushed out a branch [1] with your first > > 10 patches, followed by my own take on this particular problem. It > > compiles, and even managed to boot a Debian guest on a nVHE box. > > > > As you can see, most of the early exit handling is now moved to > > specific handlers, unifying the handling. For the protected mode, you > > can provide your own handler array (just hack > > kvm_get_exit_handler_array() to return something else), which will do > > the right thing as long as you call into the existing handlers first. > > When it comes to the ELR/SPSR handling, it is better left to the > > individual handlers (which we already do in some cases, see how we > > skip instructions, for example). > > Please let me know what you think. > > Thanks a lot for this and sorry for being late to reply. I've been > travelling. No worries, it should be me who apologies for getting to this that late. > I think that your proposal looks great. All handling is consolidated > now and handling for protected VMs can just be added on top. There are > some small issues with what parameters we need (e.g., passing struct > kvm to kvm_get_exit_handler_array), but I will sort them out and > submit them in the next round. OK. Please base these changes on top of the three patches in my branch, which I will update with actual commit messages. Thanks, M. -- Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible. _______________________________________________ kvmarm mailing list kvmarm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
