On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 03:53:10PM +0200, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
> While it is easy to get VP index from vCPU index the reverse task is hard.
> Basically, to solve it we have to walk all vCPUs checking if their VP index
> matches. For hypercalls like HvFlushVirtualAddress{List,Space}* and the
> upcoming HvSendSyntheticClusterIpi* where a single CPU may be specified in
> the whole set this is obviously sub-optimal.
>
> As VP index can be set to anything <= U32_MAX by userspace using plain
> [0..MAX_VP_INDEX] array is not a viable option. Use condensed sorted
> array with logarithmic search complexity instead. Use RCU to make read
> access as fast as possible and maintain atomicity of updates.
Quoting TLFS 5.0C section 7.8.1:
> Virtual processors are identified by using an index (VP index). The
> maximum number of virtual processors per partition supported by the
> current implementation of the hypervisor can be obtained through CPUID
> leaf 0x40000005. A virtual processor index must be less than the
> maximum number of virtual processors per partition.
so this is a dense index, and VP_INDEX >= KVM_MAX_VCPUS is invalid. I
think we're better off enforcing this in kvm_hv_set_msr and keep the
translation simple. If the algorithm in get_vcpu_by_vpidx is not good
enough (and yes it can be made to return NULL early on vpidx >=
KVM_MAX_VCPUS instead of taking the slow path) then a simple index array
of KVM_MAX_VCPUS entries should certainly do.
Roman.
