On 15/07/2019 19:17, Nadav Amit wrote:
>> On Jul 15, 2019, at 8:16 AM, Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> There is a lot of infrastructure for functionality which is used
>> exclusively in __{save,restore}_processor_state() on the suspend/resume
>> path.
>>
>> cr8 is an alias of APIC_TASKPRI, and APIC_TASKPRI is saved/restored by
>> lapic_{suspend,resume}(). Saving and restoring cr8 independently of the
>> rest of the Local APIC state isn't a clever thing to be doing.
>>
>> Delete the suspend/resume cr8 handling, which shrinks the size of struct
>> saved_context, and allows for the removal of both PVOPS.
> I think removing the interface for CR8 writes is also good to avoid
> potential correctness issues, as the SDM says (10.8.6.1 "Interaction of Task
> Priorities between CR8 and APIC”):
>
> "Operating software should implement either direct APIC TPR updates or CR8
> style TPR updates but not mix them. Software can use a serializing
> instruction (for example, CPUID) to serialize updates between MOV CR8 and
> stores to the APIC.”
>
> And native_write_cr8() did not even issue a serializing instruction.
>
Given its location, the one write_cr8() is bounded by two serialising
operations, so is safe in practice.
However, I agree with the statement in the manual. I could submit a v3
with an updated commit message, or let it be fixed on commit. Whichever
is easiest.
~Andrew
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
