Re: [RFC PATCH v4 05/18] kvm: x86: add kvm_arch_vcpu_set_regs()

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 2017-12-18 02:06 PM, Adalber Lazăr wrote:
From: Adalbert Lazar <alazar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

This is a version of kvm_arch_vcpu_ioctl_set_regs() which does not touch
the exceptions vector.

Signed-off-by: Mihai Donțu <mdontu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
  arch/x86/kvm/x86.c       | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
  include/linux/kvm_host.h |  1 +
  2 files changed, 35 insertions(+)

diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
index e1a3c2c6ec08..4b0c3692386d 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
@@ -7389,6 +7389,40 @@ int kvm_arch_vcpu_ioctl_set_regs(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm_regs *regs)
  	return 0;
  }
+/*
+ * Similar to kvm_arch_vcpu_ioctl_set_regs() but it does not reset
+ * the exceptions
+ */
+void kvm_arch_vcpu_set_regs(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm_regs *regs)
+{
+	vcpu->arch.emulate_regs_need_sync_from_vcpu = true;
+	vcpu->arch.emulate_regs_need_sync_to_vcpu = false;
+
+	kvm_register_write(vcpu, VCPU_REGS_RAX, regs->rax);
+	kvm_register_write(vcpu, VCPU_REGS_RBX, regs->rbx);
+	kvm_register_write(vcpu, VCPU_REGS_RCX, regs->rcx);
+	kvm_register_write(vcpu, VCPU_REGS_RDX, regs->rdx);
+	kvm_register_write(vcpu, VCPU_REGS_RSI, regs->rsi);
+	kvm_register_write(vcpu, VCPU_REGS_RDI, regs->rdi);
+	kvm_register_write(vcpu, VCPU_REGS_RSP, regs->rsp);
+	kvm_register_write(vcpu, VCPU_REGS_RBP, regs->rbp);
+#ifdef CONFIG_X86_64
+	kvm_register_write(vcpu, VCPU_REGS_R8, regs->r8);
+	kvm_register_write(vcpu, VCPU_REGS_R9, regs->r9);
+	kvm_register_write(vcpu, VCPU_REGS_R10, regs->r10);
+	kvm_register_write(vcpu, VCPU_REGS_R11, regs->r11);
+	kvm_register_write(vcpu, VCPU_REGS_R12, regs->r12);
+	kvm_register_write(vcpu, VCPU_REGS_R13, regs->r13);
+	kvm_register_write(vcpu, VCPU_REGS_R14, regs->r14);
+	kvm_register_write(vcpu, VCPU_REGS_R15, regs->r15);
+#endif
+
+	kvm_rip_write(vcpu, regs->rip);
+	kvm_set_rflags(vcpu, regs->rflags);
+
+	kvm_make_request(KVM_REQ_EVENT, vcpu);
+}
+

kvm_arch_vcpu_ioctl_set_regs() returns an int (so that, for e.g., in ARM it can return an error to indicate that the function is not supported/implemented). Is there a reason this function shouldn't do the same (is it only ever going to be implemented for x86)?

  void kvm_get_cs_db_l_bits(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, int *db, int *l)
  {
  	struct kvm_segment cs;
diff --git a/include/linux/kvm_host.h b/include/linux/kvm_host.h
index 6bdd4b9f6611..68e4d756f5c9 100644
--- a/include/linux/kvm_host.h
+++ b/include/linux/kvm_host.h
@@ -767,6 +767,7 @@ int kvm_arch_vcpu_ioctl_translate(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
int kvm_arch_vcpu_ioctl_get_regs(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm_regs *regs);
  int kvm_arch_vcpu_ioctl_set_regs(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm_regs *regs);
+void kvm_arch_vcpu_set_regs(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm_regs *regs);
  int kvm_arch_vcpu_ioctl_get_sregs(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
  				  struct kvm_sregs *sregs);
  int kvm_arch_vcpu_ioctl_set_sregs(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,



Patrick

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>



[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [eCos]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]
  Powered by Linux