diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'drivers/lguest/x86/core.c')
| -rw-r--r-- | drivers/lguest/x86/core.c | 77 |
1 files changed, 0 insertions, 77 deletions
diff --git a/drivers/lguest/x86/core.c b/drivers/lguest/x86/core.c index 9f1659c3d1f3..ec0cdfc04e78 100644 --- a/drivers/lguest/x86/core.c +++ b/drivers/lguest/x86/core.c @@ -352,69 +352,6 @@ static int emulate_insn(struct lg_cpu *cpu) return 1; } -/* - * Our hypercalls mechanism used to be based on direct software interrupts. - * After Anthony's "Refactor hypercall infrastructure" kvm patch, we decided to - * change over to using kvm hypercalls. - * - * KVM_HYPERCALL is actually a "vmcall" instruction, which generates an invalid - * opcode fault (fault 6) on non-VT cpus, so the easiest solution seemed to be - * an *emulation approach*: if the fault was really produced by an hypercall - * (is_hypercall() does exactly this check), we can just call the corresponding - * hypercall host implementation function. - * - * But these invalid opcode faults are notably slower than software interrupts. - * So we implemented the *patching (or rewriting) approach*: every time we hit - * the KVM_HYPERCALL opcode in Guest code, we patch it to the old "int 0x1f" - * opcode, so next time the Guest calls this hypercall it will use the - * faster trap mechanism. - * - * Matias even benchmarked it to convince you: this shows the average cycle - * cost of a hypercall. For each alternative solution mentioned above we've - * made 5 runs of the benchmark: - * - * 1) direct software interrupt: 2915, 2789, 2764, 2721, 2898 - * 2) emulation technique: 3410, 3681, 3466, 3392, 3780 - * 3) patching (rewrite) technique: 2977, 2975, 2891, 2637, 2884 - * - * One two-line function is worth a 20% hypercall speed boost! - */ -static void rewrite_hypercall(struct lg_cpu *cpu) -{ - /* - * This are the opcodes we use to patch the Guest. The opcode for "int - * $0x1f" is "0xcd 0x1f" but vmcall instruction is 3 bytes long, so we - * complete the sequence with a NOP (0x90). - */ - u8 insn[3] = {0xcd, 0x1f, 0x90}; - - __lgwrite(cpu, guest_pa(cpu, cpu->regs->eip), insn, sizeof(insn)); - /* - * The above write might have caused a copy of that page to be made - * (if it was read-only). We need to make sure the Guest has - * up-to-date pagetables. As this doesn't happen often, we can just - * drop them all. - */ - guest_pagetable_clear_all(cpu); -} - -static bool is_hypercall(struct lg_cpu *cpu) -{ - u8 insn[3]; - - /* - * This must be the Guest kernel trying to do something. - * The bottom two bits of the CS segment register are the privilege - * level. - */ - if ((cpu->regs->cs & 3) != GUEST_PL) - return false; - - /* Is it a vmcall? */ - __lgread(cpu, insn, guest_pa(cpu, cpu->regs->eip), sizeof(insn)); - return insn[0] == 0x0f && insn[1] == 0x01 && insn[2] == 0xc1; -} - /*H:050 Once we've re-enabled interrupts, we look at why the Guest exited. */ void lguest_arch_handle_trap(struct lg_cpu *cpu) { @@ -429,20 +366,6 @@ void lguest_arch_handle_trap(struct lg_cpu *cpu) if (emulate_insn(cpu)) return; } - /* - * If KVM is active, the vmcall instruction triggers a General - * Protection Fault. Normally it triggers an invalid opcode - * fault (6): - */ - case 6: - /* - * We need to check if ring == GUEST_PL and faulting - * instruction == vmcall. - */ - if (is_hypercall(cpu)) { - rewrite_hypercall(cpu); - return; - } break; case 14: /* We've intercepted a Page Fault. */ /* |