Hi Yury,
On Sat, Nov 25, 2017 at 10:52:21AM +0300, Yury Norov wrote:
>
> On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 12:41:12PM +0200, Christoffer Dall wrote:
> > Avoid saving the guest VFP registers and restoring the host VFP
> > registers on every exit from the VM. Only when we're about to run
> > userspace or other threads in the kernel do we really have to switch the
> > state back to the host state.
> >
> > We still initially configure the VFP registers to trap when entering the
> > VM, but the difference is that we now leave the guest state in the
> > hardware registers while running the VM.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_emulate.h | 5 ++++
> > arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h | 3 +++
> > arch/arm64/kernel/asm-offsets.c | 1 +
> > arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/entry.S | 3 +++
> > arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/switch.c | 47 +++++++++++-------------------------
> > arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/sysreg-sr.c | 21 +++++++++++++---
> > 6 files changed, 44 insertions(+), 36 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_emulate.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_emulate.h
> > index 1fbfe96..630dd60 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_emulate.h
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_emulate.h
> > @@ -56,6 +56,11 @@ static inline unsigned long *vcpu_hcr(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> > return (unsigned long *)&vcpu->arch.hcr_el2;
> > }
> >
> > +static inline bool vcpu_el1_is_32bit(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> > +{
> > + return (!(vcpu->arch.hcr_el2 & HCR_RW));
> > +}
> > +
> > static inline unsigned long *vcpu_pc(const struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> > {
> > return (unsigned long *)&vcpu_gp_regs(vcpu)->regs.pc;
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> > index 7d3bfa7..5e09eb9 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_host.h
> > @@ -210,6 +210,9 @@ struct kvm_vcpu_arch {
> > /* Guest debug state */
> > u64 debug_flags;
> >
> > + /* 1 if the guest VFP state is loaded into the hardware */
> > + u64 guest_vfp_loaded;
>
> May it be just u8/bool?
>
This particular field is accessed from assembly code, and I'm not sure
what guarantees the compiler makes in terms of how a u8/bool is
allocated with respect to padding and alignment, and I think that's why
we've been using u64 fields in the past.
I don't actually remember the details, but I'd rather err on the side of
caution than trying to save a few bytes. However, if someone can
convince me there's a completely safe way to do this, then I'm happy to
change it.
Thanks,
-Christoffer
