On Wed, Dec 01, 2010 at 03:01:49AM -0500, Nadav Har'El wrote: > On Mon, Nov 29, 2010, Joerg Roedel wrote about "[PATCH 0/3] KVM: Introduce VCPU-wide notion of guest-mode V2": > > Hi Avi, Hi Marcelo, > > > > here is the re-spin I promised. The change to V1 are essentially the > > renames: > > > > kvm_vcpu_enter_gm -> enter_guest_mode > > kvm_vcpu_leave_gm -> leave_guest_mode > > kvm_vcpu_is_gm -> is_guest_mode > > I like this concept, and will be happy to change the nested VMX code to use > it as well. > > One small thing: After the name change, it might not be obvious on first > sight that these functions refer to the state of the vcpu, not the state > of the actual CPU (which, if you think about it, is never in guest mode while > KVM code is running ;-)). I think that a short comment before the definition > of these functions might be useful - perhaps saying that they pertain to a > hypervisor running in the vcpu (i.e., nested virtualization). Yes, right. Thats a good thing. I sent a follow-on patch adding the comments. Btw, another idea which came up recently was to concentrate the actuall vmexit emulation at a single point. Every code place which does the exit directly today will be changed to only set a request-bit and the real exit is then done later. Your code might already do this, I havn't checked. In fact the idea is from the neste-VMX patchset for Xen :) This would fit very well in the generic code because it already has request-bit infrastructure. What do you think, can nested VMX also make use of that too? Joerg -- AMD Operating System Research Center Advanced Micro Devices GmbH Einsteinring 24 85609 Dornach General Managers: Alberto Bozzo, Andrew Bowd Registration: Dornach, Landkr. Muenchen; Registerger. Muenchen, HRB Nr. 43632 -- 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
