Hi Ard, On 20/02/2020 17:04, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > On Thu, 20 Feb 2020 at 17:58, James Morse <james.mo...@arm.com> wrote: >> It turns out KVM relies on the inline hint being honoured by the compiler >> in quite a few more places than expected. Something about the Shadow Call >> Stack support[0] causes the compiler to avoid inline-ing and to place >> these functions outside the __hyp_text. This ruins KVM's day. >> >> Add the simon-says __always_inline annotation to all the static >> inlines that KVM calls from HYP code.
> This isn't quite as yuck as I expected, fortunately, but it does beg > the question whether we shouldn't simply map the entire kernel at EL2 > instead? If the kernel is big enough to need internal veneers (the 128M range?), these would certainly go horribly wrong because its running somewhere other than the relocation-time address. We would need a way of telling the linker to keep the bits of KVM close together... Thanks, James _______________________________________________ kvmarm mailing list kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
