From: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
To: Nadav Amit <namit@vmware.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@kernel.org>,
"virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org"
<virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
Stephane Eranian <eranian@google.com>,
Feng Tang <feng.tang@intel.com>, Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>,
Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
"Pavel Machek" <pavel@ucw.cz>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] x86/paravirt: Drop {read,write}_cr8() hooks
Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 00:30:09 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4a7592c8-0ee8-f394-c445-4032daf74493@citrix.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <602B4D96-E2A9-45BE-8247-4E3481ED5402@vmware.com>
On 15/07/2019 19:17, Nadav Amit wrote:
>> On Jul 15, 2019, at 8:16 AM, Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com> 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
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-07-15 23:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-07-15 15:16 Andrew Cooper
2019-07-15 18:17 ` Nadav Amit
2019-07-15 23:30 ` Andrew Cooper [this message]
2019-07-16 0:05 ` Andy Lutomirski
2019-07-19 13:44 ` Andrew Cooper
2019-07-16 0:54 ` Nadav Amit
2019-07-16 4:15 ` Juergen Gross
2019-07-22 8:16 ` [tip:x86/apic] " tip-bot for Andrew Cooper
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4a7592c8-0ee8-f394-c445-4032daf74493@citrix.com \
--to=andrew.cooper3@citrix.com \
--cc=boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=eranian@google.com \
--cc=feng.tang@intel.com \
--cc=jgross@suse.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=namit@vmware.com \
--cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®