On 22.01.2010, at 11:54, Liu Yu wrote:

> Old method prematurely sets ESR and DEAR.
> Move this part after we decide to inject interrupt,
> and make it more like hardware behave.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Liu Yu <yu....@freescale.com>
> ---
> arch/powerpc/kvm/booke.c   |   24 ++++++++++++++----------
> arch/powerpc/kvm/emulate.c |    2 --
> 2 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kvm/booke.c b/arch/powerpc/kvm/booke.c
> index e283e44..a8ee148 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/kvm/booke.c
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kvm/booke.c
> @@ -84,7 +84,8 @@ static void kvmppc_booke_queue_irqprio(struct kvm_vcpu 
> *vcpu,
> 
> void kvmppc_core_queue_program(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, ulong flags)
> {
> -     /* BookE does flags in ESR, so ignore those we get here */
> +     if (flags == SRR1_PROGTRAP)
> +             vcpu->arch.fault_esr = ESR_PTR;

This looks odd. I was more thinking of "flags" being ESR in this context. So 
you'd save off flags to a field in the vcpu here and restore it later when the 
fault actually gets injected.

>       kvmppc_booke_queue_irqprio(vcpu, BOOKE_IRQPRIO_PROGRAM);
> }
> 
> @@ -115,14 +116,19 @@ static int kvmppc_booke_irqprio_deliver(struct kvm_vcpu 
> *vcpu,
> {
>       int allowed = 0;
>       ulong msr_mask;
> +     bool update_esr = false, update_dear = false;
> 
>       switch (priority) {
> -     case BOOKE_IRQPRIO_PROGRAM:
>       case BOOKE_IRQPRIO_DTLB_MISS:
> -     case BOOKE_IRQPRIO_ITLB_MISS:
> -     case BOOKE_IRQPRIO_SYSCALL:

Is this correct? Was the previous order wrong according to the spec?

>       case BOOKE_IRQPRIO_DATA_STORAGE:
> +             update_dear = true;
> +             /* fall through */
>       case BOOKE_IRQPRIO_INST_STORAGE:
> +     case BOOKE_IRQPRIO_PROGRAM:
> +             update_esr = true;
> +             /* fall through */
> +     case BOOKE_IRQPRIO_ITLB_MISS:
> +     case BOOKE_IRQPRIO_SYSCALL:
>       case BOOKE_IRQPRIO_FP_UNAVAIL:
>       case BOOKE_IRQPRIO_SPE_UNAVAIL:
>       case BOOKE_IRQPRIO_SPE_FP_DATA:
> @@ -157,6 +163,10 @@ static int kvmppc_booke_irqprio_deliver(struct kvm_vcpu 
> *vcpu,
>               vcpu->arch.srr0 = vcpu->arch.pc;
>               vcpu->arch.srr1 = vcpu->arch.msr;
>               vcpu->arch.pc = vcpu->arch.ivpr | vcpu->arch.ivor[priority];
> +             if (update_esr == true)
> +                     vcpu->arch.esr = vcpu->arch.fault_esr;

I'd rather like to see new fields used for that.

> +             if (update_dear == true)
> +                     vcpu->arch.dear = vcpu->arch.fault_dear;

same here

>               kvmppc_set_msr(vcpu, vcpu->arch.msr & msr_mask);
> 
>               clear_bit(priority, &vcpu->arch.pending_exceptions);
> @@ -229,7 +239,6 @@ int kvmppc_handle_exit(struct kvm_run *run, struct 
> kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
>               if (vcpu->arch.msr & MSR_PR) {
>                       /* Program traps generated by user-level software must 
> be handled
>                        * by the guest kernel. */
> -                     vcpu->arch.esr = vcpu->arch.fault_esr;
>                       kvmppc_booke_queue_irqprio(vcpu, BOOKE_IRQPRIO_PROGRAM);
>                       r = RESUME_GUEST;
>                       kvmppc_account_exit(vcpu, USR_PR_INST);
> @@ -286,15 +295,12 @@ int kvmppc_handle_exit(struct kvm_run *run, struct 
> kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
>               break;
> 
>       case BOOKE_INTERRUPT_DATA_STORAGE:
> -             vcpu->arch.dear = vcpu->arch.fault_dear;
> -             vcpu->arch.esr = vcpu->arch.fault_esr;
>               kvmppc_booke_queue_irqprio(vcpu, BOOKE_IRQPRIO_DATA_STORAGE);

kvmppc_booke_queue_data_storage(vcpu, vcpu->arch.fault_esr, 
vcpu->arch.fault_dear);

>               kvmppc_account_exit(vcpu, DSI_EXITS);
>               r = RESUME_GUEST;
>               break;
> 
>       case BOOKE_INTERRUPT_INST_STORAGE:
> -             vcpu->arch.esr = vcpu->arch.fault_esr;
>               kvmppc_booke_queue_irqprio(vcpu, BOOKE_IRQPRIO_INST_STORAGE);

kvmppc_booke_queue_inst_storage(vcpu, vcpu->arch.fault_esr);

>               kvmppc_account_exit(vcpu, ISI_EXITS);
>               r = RESUME_GUEST;
> @@ -317,8 +323,6 @@ int kvmppc_handle_exit(struct kvm_run *run, struct 
> kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
>               if (gtlb_index < 0) {
>                       /* The guest didn't have a mapping for it. */
>                       kvmppc_booke_queue_irqprio(vcpu, 
> BOOKE_IRQPRIO_DTLB_MISS);

see above

> -                     vcpu->arch.dear = vcpu->arch.fault_dear;
> -                     vcpu->arch.esr = vcpu->arch.fault_esr;
>                       kvmppc_mmu_dtlb_miss(vcpu);
>                       kvmppc_account_exit(vcpu, DTLB_REAL_MISS_EXITS);
>                       r = RESUME_GUEST;
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kvm/emulate.c b/arch/powerpc/kvm/emulate.c
> index b905623..4f6b9df 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/kvm/emulate.c
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kvm/emulate.c
> @@ -151,8 +151,6 @@ int kvmppc_emulate_instruction(struct kvm_run *run, 
> struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>       case OP_TRAP:
> #ifdef CONFIG_PPC64
>       case OP_TRAP_64:
> -#else
> -             vcpu->arch.esr |= ESR_PTR;
> #endif
>               kvmppc_core_queue_program(vcpu, SRR1_PROGTRAP);

kvmppc_core_queue_program(vcpu, vcpu->arch.esr | ESR_PTR);


Alex--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm-ppc" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to