On 10/15/2009 11:41 PM, oritw@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
From: Orit Wasserman<oritw@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c | 70 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
1 files changed, 65 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c
index 71bd91a..411cbdb 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/vmx.c
@@ -61,15 +61,26 @@ module_param_named(unrestricted_guest,
static int __read_mostly emulate_invalid_guest_state = 0;
module_param(emulate_invalid_guest_state, bool, S_IRUGO);
-struct vmcs {
- u32 revision_id;
- u32 abort;
- char data[0];
+struct __attribute__ ((__packed__)) level_state {
+ /* Has the level1 guest done vmclear? */
+ bool vmclear;
};
Why __packed__?
struct nested_vmx {
/* Has the level1 guest done vmxon? */
bool vmxon;
+
+ /*
+ * Level 2 state : includes vmcs,registers and
+ * a copy of vmcs12 for vmread/vmwrite
+ */
+ struct level_state *l2_state;
+};
+
+struct vmcs {
+ u32 revision_id;
+ u32 abort;
+ char data[0];
};
Why move struct vmcs around?
+
static int handle_vmoff(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
{
struct vcpu_vmx *vmx = to_vmx(vcpu);
@@ -3310,6 +3368,8 @@ static int handle_vmon(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
vmx->nested.vmxon = 1;
+ create_l2_state(vcpu);
+
Need to check return code.
--
I have a truly marvellous patch that fixes the bug which this
signature is too narrow to contain.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
