From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA132C433DF for ; Thu, 2 Jul 2020 23:24:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.xenproject.org (lists.xenproject.org [192.237.175.120]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 971F220760 for ; Thu, 2 Jul 2020 23:24:36 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=citrix.com header.i=@citrix.com header.b="dSkUvgeH" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 971F220760 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=citrix.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.xenproject.org) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jr8Yw-0005nb-SX; Thu, 02 Jul 2020 23:24:14 +0000 Received: from us1-rack-iad1.inumbo.com ([172.99.69.81]) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jr8Yv-0005nV-Ku for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Thu, 02 Jul 2020 23:24:13 +0000 X-Inumbo-ID: 2329bb8e-bcbb-11ea-bca7-bc764e2007e4 Received: from esa4.hc3370-68.iphmx.com (unknown [216.71.155.144]) by us1-rack-iad1.inumbo.com (Halon) with ESMTPS id 2329bb8e-bcbb-11ea-bca7-bc764e2007e4; Thu, 02 Jul 2020 23:24:12 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=citrix.com; s=securemail; t=1593732252; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date: mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=DD/40Qz8qZ78c4jky0R8eJwe8SV5DGFlqxwDiyq60pw=; b=dSkUvgeHtKGv8ckYivVY5J7d7/bFXIX60d6R2n8P14Cg/5guSF2fcJIN ayhG79qAW3QIAAHZ46z3oHU0wdFYBLZQwEuIFeeu7/nNwGgFDU1nvzrlu PiXF94l4++psFputDy+FfWtXcocL4FwJMNRallnLRMYV+uJ5qr5v939pE o=; Authentication-Results: esa4.hc3370-68.iphmx.com; dkim=none (message not signed) header.i=none IronPort-SDR: EHdLL4zhLW9bpSAxAYvRa35rsjy9utSWkFNwQ8GKYJ+LgLEnAwpznR4lbdlktDiJaHK1o4M5lZ S9HVefjH7PkelGMqcFH6RJL0JqHfpf9IcxUSI8VAQovcbJluYYMeF1D8rqexJXsykDNol2W6J9 zkUhu+rXVjkd5mxogyU8jPVFs0w0NNcM6Mrh4UdjXGLcHhpaa7BnEGf9ra8xsTjZKldT9NTuNF qTi/2UdOord7K58h1mQXpcGPw8obNGNY7+e1hE0eYiOjt5TnUJpkspi3E+mRNaXVAAtuQJ4Dr7 fRM= X-SBRS: 2.7 X-MesageID: 22346397 X-Ironport-Server: esa4.hc3370-68.iphmx.com X-Remote-IP: 162.221.158.21 X-Policy: $RELAYED X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.75,305,1589256000"; d="scan'208";a="22346397" Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] x86/xen: remove 32-bit Xen PV guest support To: Boris Ostrovsky , Juergen Gross , , , References: <20200701110650.16172-1-jgross@suse.com> <20200701110650.16172-2-jgross@suse.com> <6d0b517a-6c53-61d3-117b-40e33e013037@oracle.com> From: Andrew Cooper Message-ID: <9f8cc440-82f0-d6d8-945d-19c48f69a6b0@citrix.com> Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2020 00:24:06 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <6d0b517a-6c53-61d3-117b-40e33e013037@oracle.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Language: en-GB X-ClientProxiedBy: AMSPEX02CAS02.citrite.net (10.69.22.113) To AMSPEX02CL02.citrite.net (10.69.22.126) X-BeenThere: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Xen developer discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Stefano Stabellini , Ingo Molnar , Borislav Petkov , Andy Lutomirski , "H. Peter Anvin" , Thomas Gleixner Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org Sender: "Xen-devel" On 02/07/2020 23:59, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: > On 7/1/20 7:06 AM, Juergen Gross wrote: >> >> -#ifdef CONFIG_X86_PAE >> -static void xen_set_pte_atomic(pte_t *ptep, pte_t pte) >> -{ >> - trace_xen_mmu_set_pte_atomic(ptep, pte); >> - __xen_set_pte(ptep, pte); > > Probably not for this series but I wonder whether __xen_set_pte() should > continue to use hypercall now that we are 64-bit only. The hypercall path is a SYSCALL (and SYSRET out). The "writeable" PTE path is a #PF, followed by an x86 instruction emulation, which then reaches the same logic as the hypercall path (and an IRET out). ~Andrew