Re: [PULL] virtio/vhost: cross endian support
flat view
From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Date: 2015-07-07 16:52:00
Also in:
kvm, lkml, virtualization
On Tue, Jul 07, 2015 at 06:36:53PM +0200, Thomas Huth wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
On Thu, 2 Jul 2015 11:32:52 +0200 "Michael S. Tsirkin" [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
On Thu, Jul 02, 2015 at 11:12:56AM +0200, Greg Kurz wrote:quoted
On Thu, 2 Jul 2015 08:01:28 +0200 "Michael S. Tsirkin" [off-list ref] wrote:...quoted
quoted
quoted
Yea, well - support for legacy BE guests on the new LE hosts is exactly the motivation for this. I dislike it too, but there are two redeeming properties that made me merge this: 1. It's a trivial amount of code: since we wrap host/guest accesses anyway, almost all of it is well hidden from drivers. 2. Sane platforms would never set flags like VHOST_CROSS_ENDIAN_LEGACY - and when it's clear, there's zero overhead (as some point it was tested by compiling with and without the patches, got the same stripped binary). Maybe we could create a Kconfig symbol to enforce point (2): prevent people from enabling it e.g. on x86. I will look into this - but it can be done by a patch on top, so I think this can be merged as is.This cross-endian *oddity* is targeting PowerPC book3s_64 processors... I am not aware of any other users. Maybe create a symbol that would be only selected by PPC_BOOK3S_64 ?I think some ARM systems are trying to support cross-endian configurations as well. Besides that, yes, this is more or less what I had in mind.Would something simple like this already do the job:diff --git a/drivers/vhost/Kconfig b/drivers/vhost/Kconfig --- a/drivers/vhost/Kconfig +++ b/drivers/vhost/Kconfig@@ -35,6 +35,7 @@ config VHOST config VHOST_CROSS_ENDIAN_LEGACY bool "Cross-endian support for vhost" + depends on KVM_BOOK3S_64 || KVM_ARM_HOST default n ---help--- This option allows vhost to support guests with a different byte?
Do all ARM hosts support this dynamic endian-ness?
If that looks acceptable, I can submit a proper patch if you like. Thomas
I think I prefer some kind of symbol defined by these arches, so I don't get to maintain an arch list in vhost. -- MST