From: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
To: Tim Deegan <tim@xen.org>
Cc: "George Dunlap" <George.Dunlap@eu.citrix.com>,
"xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org" <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>,
"Roger Pau Monné" <roger.pau@citrix.com>, "Wei Liu" <wl@xen.org>,
"Andrew Cooper" <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] x86/shadow: l3table[] and gl3e[] are HVM only
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2020 10:55:21 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1baa0d50-86a4-b0ba-d43a-ad0c0446b54b@suse.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200718182037.GA48915@deinos.phlegethon.org>
On 18.07.2020 20:20, Tim Deegan wrote:
> At 12:00 +0200 on 15 Jul (1594814409), Jan Beulich wrote:
>> ... by the very fact that they're 3-level specific, while PV always gets
>> run in 4-level mode. This requires adding some seemingly redundant
>> #ifdef-s - some of them will be possible to drop again once 2- and
>> 3-level guest code doesn't get built anymore in !HVM configs, but I'm
>> afraid there's still quite a bit of disentangling work to be done to
>> make this possible.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
>
> Looks good. It seems like the new code for '3-level non-HVM' in
> guest-walks ought to have some sort of assert-unreachable in them too
> - or is there a reason to to?
You mean this piece of code
+#elif !defined(CONFIG_HVM)
+ (void)root_gfn;
+ memset(gw, 0, sizeof(*gw));
+ return false;
+#else /* PAE */
If so - sure, ASSERT_UNREACHABLE() could be added there. It simply
didn't occur to me. I take it your ack for the entire series holds
here with this addition.
Jan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-07-20 8:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-07-15 9:56 [PATCH 0/5] x86: mostly shadow related XSA-319 follow-up Jan Beulich
2020-07-15 9:58 ` [PATCH 1/5] x86/shadow: dirty VRAM tracking is needed for HVM only Jan Beulich
2020-07-15 9:58 ` [PATCH 2/5] x86/shadow: shadow_table[] needs only one entry for PV-only configs Jan Beulich
2020-07-15 9:59 ` [PATCH 3/5] x86/PV: drop a few misleading paging_mode_refcounts() checks Jan Beulich
2020-07-31 14:58 ` Ping: " Jan Beulich
2020-07-31 15:17 ` Andrew Cooper
2020-07-15 9:59 ` [PATCH 4/5] x86/shadow: have just a single instance of sh_set_toplevel_shadow() Jan Beulich
2020-07-15 10:00 ` [PATCH 5/5] x86/shadow: l3table[] and gl3e[] are HVM only Jan Beulich
2020-07-18 18:20 ` Tim Deegan
2020-07-20 8:55 ` Jan Beulich [this message]
2020-07-20 17:37 ` Tim Deegan
2020-07-18 18:21 ` [PATCH 0/5] x86: mostly shadow related XSA-319 follow-up Tim Deegan
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=1baa0d50-86a4-b0ba-d43a-ad0c0446b54b@suse.com \
--to=jbeulich@suse.com \
--cc=George.Dunlap@eu.citrix.com \
--cc=andrew.cooper3@citrix.com \
--cc=roger.pau@citrix.com \
--cc=tim@xen.org \
--cc=wl@xen.org \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xenproject.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).