Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 18 Jun 2012 18:01:59 +0300 | From | Avi Kivity <> | Subject | Re: [PATCHv7 3/8] kvm_para: guest side for eoi avoidance |
| |
On 06/18/2012 05:50 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > >> > >> > +/* size alignment is implied but just to make it explicit. */ >> > +static DEFINE_PER_CPU(unsigned long, kvm_apic_eoi) __aligned(2) = >> > + KVM_PV_EOI_DISABLED; >> >> You're actually breaking the alignment. ulong has 8 byte alignment >> sometimes and you can make it cross cache boundary this way. > > No, if you look at the definition of __aligned > you will see that it limits the alignment from below. > Compiler still applies the natural size alignment. > You are not the first to get confused. So I wonder: is it better > to add a comment or simply remove __aligned here.
Both.
>> > >> > + if (kvm_para_has_feature(KVM_FEATURE_PV_EOI)) { >> > + __get_cpu_var(kvm_apic_eoi) = 0; >> > + wrmsrl(MSR_KVM_PV_EOI_EN, __pa(&__get_cpu_var(kvm_apic_eoi)) | >> > + KVM_MSR_ENABLED); >> >> Bad formatting. > > I guess temporary will make it prettier. > unsigned long pa; > __get_cpu_var(kvm_apic_eoi) = 0; > pa = __pa(&__get_cpu_var(kvm_apic_eoi)) | KVM_MSR_ENABLED; > wrmsrl(MSR_KVM_PV_EOI_EN, pa);
That, or
+ wrmsrl(MSR_KVM_PV_EOI_EN, + __pa(&__get_cpu_var(kvm_apic_eoi)) | _ENABLED);
You have an argument split over two lines with no helpful indentation to show this.
>> >> >> Please check that the kexec path also disables pveoi. > > The chunk in kvm_pv_guest_cpu_reboot does this, doesn't it?
Dunno, does it?
-- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
| |