Avi Kivity wrote: > On 03/08/2010 04:14 PM, Alexander Graf wrote: >> >> We're looking at two different ifs here. >> >> 1) GPR Inside the PACA or not (volatile vs non-volatile) >> >> This is constant. Volatile registers go to the PACA; non-volatiles go to >> the vcpu struct. >> > > Okay - so no if (). Eh. r[0 - 12] are volatile r[13 - 31] are non-volatile So if we want a common gpr access function we need an if. And we need one, because the opcodes just use register numbers and doesn't care where they are. > >> 2) GPR actually loaded in the PACA >> >> When we're in vcpu_load context the registers in the PACA, when not >> they're in the vcpu struct >> >> >> If you have a really easy and fast way to assure that we're always >> inside a vcpu_load context, all is great. I could probably even just put >> in a BUG_ON(not in vcpu_load context) and make the callers safe. But >> some check needs to be done. >> > > x86 assumes in vcpu_load() context (without even a BUG_ON()). > KVM_GET_REGS and friends are responsible for this. Oh, interesting. Just drop this patch then :). Alex -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm-ppc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
