On 11/30/20 7:04 PM, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Mon, 2020-11-30 at 18:41 +0000, Joao Martins wrote:
>> int kvm_emulate_hypercall(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>> {
>> ...
>> if (kvm_hv_hypercall_enabled(vcpu->kvm))
>> return kvm_hv_hypercall(...);
>>
>> if (kvm_xen_hypercall_enabled(vcpu->kvm))
>> return kvm_xen_hypercall(...);
>> ...
>> }
>>
>> And on kvm_xen_hypercall() for the cases VMM offloads to demarshal what the registers mean
>> e.g. for event channel send 64-bit guest: RAX for opcode and RDI/RSI for cmd and port.
>
> Right, although it's a little more abstract than that: "RDI/RSI for
> arg#0, arg#1 respectively".
>
> And those are RDI/RSI for 64-bit Xen, EBX/ECX for 32-bit Xen, and
> RBX/RDI for Hyper-V. (And Hyper-V seems to use only the two, while Xen
> theoretically has up to 6).
>
Indeed, almost reminds my other patch for xen hypercalls -- it was handling 32-bit and
64-bit that way:
https://lore.kernel.org/kvm/20190220201609.28290-3-joao.m.martins@xxxxxxxxxx/
>> The kernel logic wouldn't be much different at the core, so thought of tihs consolidation.
>> But the added complexity would have come from having to deal with two userspace exit types
>> -- indeed probably not worth the trouble as you pointed out.
>
> Yeah, I think I'm just going to move the 'kvm_userspace_hypercall()'
> from my patch to be 'kvm_xen_hypercall()' in a new xen.c but still
> using KVM_EXIT_HYPERCALL. Then I can rebase your other patches on top
> of that, with the evtchn bypass.
>
Yeap, makes sense.
Joao
