On 15.05.2024 11:10, Sergiy Kibrik wrote:
> @@ -38,7 +38,10 @@ static inline bool altp2m_active(const struct domain *d)
> }
>
> /* Only declaration is needed. DCE will optimise it out when linking. */
> +void altp2m_vcpu_initialise(struct vcpu *v);
> +void altp2m_vcpu_destroy(struct vcpu *v);
> uint16_t altp2m_vcpu_idx(const struct vcpu *v);
> +int altp2m_vcpu_enable_ve(struct vcpu *v, gfn_t gfn);
> void altp2m_vcpu_disable_ve(struct vcpu *v);
These additions look unrelated, as long as the description says nothing in
this regard.
> --- a/xen/arch/x86/include/asm/hvm/hvm.h
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/include/asm/hvm/hvm.h
> @@ -670,7 +670,7 @@ static inline bool hvm_hap_supported(void)
> /* returns true if hardware supports alternate p2m's */
> static inline bool hvm_altp2m_supported(void)
> {
> - return hvm_funcs.caps.altp2m;
> + return IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ALTP2M) && hvm_funcs.caps.altp2m;
Which in turn raises the question whether the altp2m struct field shouldn't
become conditional upon CONFIG_ALTP2M too (or rather: instead, as the change
here then would need to be done differently). Yet maybe that would entail
further changes elsewhere, so may well better be left for later.
> --- a/xen/arch/x86/mm/Makefile
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/mm/Makefile
> @@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
> obj-y += shadow/
> obj-$(CONFIG_HVM) += hap/
>
> -obj-$(CONFIG_HVM) += altp2m.o
> +obj-$(CONFIG_ALTP2M) += altp2m.o
This change I think wants to move to patch 5.
Jan
