lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Oct]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH] KVM: X86: Make fpu allocation a common function
From
Date
On 10/15/2019 2:37 AM, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 14, 2019 at 06:58:49PM +0200, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
>> Xiaoyao Li <xiaoyao.li@intel.com> writes:
>>
>>> They are duplicated codes to create vcpu.arch.{user,guest}_fpu in VMX
>>> and SVM. Make them common functions.
>>>
>>> No functional change intended.
>>
>> Would it rather make sense to move this code to
>> kvm_arch_vcpu_create()/kvm_arch_vcpu_destroy() instead?
>
> Does it make sense? Yes. Would it actually work? No. Well, not without
> other shenanigans.
>
> FPU allocation can't be placed after the call to .create_vcpu() becuase
> it's consumed in kvm_arch_vcpu_init(). FPU allocation can't come before
> .create_vcpu() because the vCPU struct itself hasn't been allocated. The
> latter could be solved by passed the FPU pointer into .create_vcpu(), but
> that's a bit ugly and is not a precedent we want to set.
>

That's exactly what I found.

> At a glance, FPU allocation can be moved to kvm_arch_vcpu_init(), maybe
> right before the call to fx_init().
>

Yeah, putting here is better.

I'm wondering the semantic of create, init, setup. There are
vcpu_{create,init,setup}, and IIUC, vcpu_create is mainly for data
structure allocation and vcpu_{init,setup} should be for data structure
initialization/setup (and maybe they could/should merge into one)

But I feel the current codes for vcpu creation a bit messed, especially
of vmx.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-10-15 02:48    [W:0.142 / U:0.316 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site