Re: [RFC PATCH 2/9] KVM: PPC: Book3S 64: Move GUEST_MODE_SKIP test into KVM
flat view
From: Daniel Axtens <hidden>
Date: 2021-02-19 06:03:37
Hi Nick,
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
+maybe_skip: + cmpwi r12,0x200 + beq 1f + cmpwi r12,0x300 + beq 1f + cmpwi r12,0x380 + beq 1f +#ifdef CONFIG_KVM_BOOK3S_HV_POSSIBLE + /* XXX: cbe stuff? instruction breakpoint? */ + cmpwi r12,0xe02 + beq 2f +#endif + b no_skip +1: mfspr r9,SPRN_SRR0 + addi r9,r9,4 + mtspr SPRN_SRR0,r9 + ld r12,HSTATE_SCRATCH0(r13) + ld r9,HSTATE_SCRATCH2(r13) + GET_SCRATCH0(r13) + RFI_TO_KERNEL +#ifdef CONFIG_KVM_BOOK3S_HV_POSSIBLE +2: mfspr r9,SPRN_HSRR0 + addi r9,r9,4 + mtspr SPRN_HSRR0,r9 + ld r12,HSTATE_SCRATCH0(r13) + ld r9,HSTATE_SCRATCH2(r13) + GET_SCRATCH0(r13) + HRFI_TO_KERNEL +#endif
If I understand correctly, label 1 is the kvmppc_skip_interrupt and label 2 is the kvmppc_skip_Hinterrupt. Would it be easier to understand if we used symbolic labels, or do you think the RFI_TO_KERNEL vs HRFI_TO_KERNEL and other changes are sufficient? Apart from that, I haven't checked the precise copy-paste to make sure nothing has changed by accident, but I am able to follow the general idea of the patch and am vigorously in favour of anything that simplifies our exception/interrupt paths! Kind regards, Daniel
-- 2.23.0