On Fri, 27 Aug 2021 11:16:02 +0100,
Fuad Tabba <tabba@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> We need struct kvm to check for protected VMs to be able to pick
> the right handlers for them.
>
> Mark the handler functions inline, since some handlers will be
> called in future code from the protected VM handlers.
>
> Signed-off-by: Fuad Tabba <tabba@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/include/hyp/switch.h | 16 ++++++++--------
> arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/nvhe/switch.c | 2 +-
> arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/vhe/switch.c | 2 +-
> 3 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/include/hyp/switch.h b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/include/hyp/switch.h
> index 0397606c0951..7cbff0ee59a5 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/include/hyp/switch.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/include/hyp/switch.h
> @@ -163,7 +163,7 @@ static inline void __hyp_sve_restore_guest(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> * If FP/SIMD is not implemented, handle the trap and inject an undefined
> * instruction exception to the guest. Similarly for trapped SVE accesses.
> */
> -static bool kvm_hyp_handle_fpsimd(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 *exit_code)
> +static inline bool kvm_hyp_handle_fpsimd(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 *exit_code)
No, please don't do that. We already have function pointers for each
of these, so by doing that you are forcing the compiler to emit the
code *twice*.
Instead, call into the relevant EC handler by using the base array
that already does the non-protected handling.
> {
> bool sve_guest, sve_host;
> u8 esr_ec;
> @@ -318,7 +318,7 @@ static inline bool esr_is_ptrauth_trap(u32 esr)
>
> DECLARE_PER_CPU(struct kvm_cpu_context, kvm_hyp_ctxt);
>
> -static bool kvm_hyp_handle_ptrauth(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 *exit_code)
> +static inline bool kvm_hyp_handle_ptrauth(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 *exit_code)
> {
> struct kvm_cpu_context *ctxt;
> u64 val;
> @@ -343,7 +343,7 @@ static bool kvm_hyp_handle_ptrauth(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 *exit_code)
> return true;
> }
>
> -static bool kvm_hyp_handle_sysreg(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 *exit_code)
> +static inline bool kvm_hyp_handle_sysreg(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 *exit_code)
> {
> if (cpus_have_final_cap(ARM64_WORKAROUND_CAVIUM_TX2_219_TVM) &&
> handle_tx2_tvm(vcpu))
> @@ -356,7 +356,7 @@ static bool kvm_hyp_handle_sysreg(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 *exit_code)
> return false;
> }
>
> -static bool kvm_hyp_handle_cp15(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 *exit_code)
> +static inline bool kvm_hyp_handle_cp15(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 *exit_code)
> {
> if (static_branch_unlikely(&vgic_v3_cpuif_trap) &&
> __vgic_v3_perform_cpuif_access(vcpu) == 1)
> @@ -365,7 +365,7 @@ static bool kvm_hyp_handle_cp15(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 *exit_code)
> return false;
> }
>
> -static bool kvm_hyp_handle_iabt_low(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 *exit_code)
> +static inline bool kvm_hyp_handle_iabt_low(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 *exit_code)
> {
> if (!__populate_fault_info(vcpu))
> return true;
> @@ -373,7 +373,7 @@ static bool kvm_hyp_handle_iabt_low(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 *exit_code)
> return false;
> }
>
> -static bool kvm_hyp_handle_dabt_low(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 *exit_code)
> +static inline bool kvm_hyp_handle_dabt_low(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 *exit_code)
> {
> if (!__populate_fault_info(vcpu))
> return true;
> @@ -403,7 +403,7 @@ static bool kvm_hyp_handle_dabt_low(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 *exit_code)
>
> typedef bool (*exit_handler_fn)(struct kvm_vcpu *, u64 *);
>
> -static const exit_handler_fn *kvm_get_exit_handler_array(void);
> +const exit_handler_fn *kvm_get_exit_handler_array(struct kvm *kvm);
Why? What breaks if when this is static? There really shouldn't be
anything else referencing this array.
Thanks,
M.
--
Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.
