On 03.07.2013, at 19:18, Scott Wood wrote:
> On 07/03/2013 07:42:36 AM, Mihai Caraman wrote:
>> Increase FPU laziness by calling kvmppc_load_guest_fp() just before
>> returning to guest instead of each sched in. Without this improvement
>> an interrupt may also claim floting point corrupting guest state.
>> Signed-off-by: Mihai Caraman <mihai.caraman@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> arch/powerpc/kvm/booke.c | 1 +
>> arch/powerpc/kvm/e500mc.c | 2 --
>> 2 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kvm/booke.c b/arch/powerpc/kvm/booke.c
>> index 113961f..3cae2e3 100644
>> --- a/arch/powerpc/kvm/booke.c
>> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kvm/booke.c
>> @@ -1204,6 +1204,7 @@ int kvmppc_handle_exit(struct kvm_run *run, struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
>> r = (s << 2) | RESUME_HOST | (r & RESUME_FLAG_NV);
>> } else {
>> kvmppc_lazy_ee_enable();
>> + kvmppc_load_guest_fp(vcpu);
>> }
>
> This should go before the kvmppc_lazy_ee_enable().
Why? What difference does that make? We're running with interrupts disabled here, right?
Alex
--
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
