From patchwork Wed Mar 29 20:51:36 2023 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Andrew Cooper X-Patchwork-Id: 13193214 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists.xenproject.org (lists.xenproject.org [192.237.175.120]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F2E96C77B6D for ; Wed, 29 Mar 2023 20:52:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by lists.xenproject.org with outflank-mailman.516355.800390 (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1phcm1-0007s7-Ll; Wed, 29 Mar 2023 20:52:01 +0000 X-Outflank-Mailman: Message body and most headers restored to incoming version Received: by outflank-mailman (output) from mailman id 516355.800390; Wed, 29 Mar 2023 20:52:01 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.xenproject.org) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1phcm1-0007rs-Es; Wed, 29 Mar 2023 20:52:01 +0000 Received: by outflank-mailman (input) for mailman id 516355; Wed, 29 Mar 2023 20:51:59 +0000 Received: from se1-gles-flk1-in.inumbo.com ([94.247.172.50] helo=se1-gles-flk1.inumbo.com) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1phclz-0005Jv-GY for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Wed, 29 Mar 2023 20:51:59 +0000 Received: from esa6.hc3370-68.iphmx.com (esa6.hc3370-68.iphmx.com [216.71.155.175]) by se1-gles-flk1.inumbo.com (Halon) with ESMTPS id 8b19d3ed-ce73-11ed-b464-930f4c7d94ae; Wed, 29 Mar 2023 22:51:57 +0200 (CEST) X-BeenThere: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org List-Id: Xen developer discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org Precedence: list Sender: "Xen-devel" X-Inumbo-ID: 8b19d3ed-ce73-11ed-b464-930f4c7d94ae DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=citrix.com; s=securemail; t=1680123117; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to: references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Il0Yw0uTJOQO+YSoWdWwJOOO1fJO0IpRzyBpho+xVZQ=; b=cvRW9D/0lAamAEGRBiOHmlhMA7tks0VgrvBYQqIKfTHSRoH+cmx1qTh0 Nd/xhuwaDnHr2m38+LZPilYT3LPouMhxdR5R8o4YjHzzH392HKiVbEk62 WGWT9I9QXXPZZHQF9XBWjbMQwNbCGj8cfyTIJVHnH6llyusa7vhBO+h+8 c=; Authentication-Results: esa6.hc3370-68.iphmx.com; dkim=none (message not signed) header.i=none X-SBRS: 4.0 X-MesageID: 102947422 X-Ironport-Server: esa6.hc3370-68.iphmx.com X-Remote-IP: 162.221.156.123 X-Policy: $RELAYED IronPort-Data: A9a23:xg4npqpdEWLqvtj/MQQKEUu+KlBeBmJiZRIvgKrLsJaIsI4StFCzt garIBmOPquJYmL9f4xwbY6090gF75SDyIVhSgZl/io3QXkX8puZCYyVIHmrMnLJJKUvbq7FA +Y2MYCccZ9uHhcwgj/3b9ANeFEljfngqoLUUbKCYWYpA1c/Ek/NsDo788YhmIlknNOlNA2Ev NL2sqX3NUSsnjV5KQr40YrawP9UlKm06WNwUmAWP6gR5weFzShNVvrzGInqR5fGatgMdgKFb 76rIIGRpgvx4xorA9W5pbf3GmVirmn6ZFXmZtJ+AsBOszAazsAA+v9T2Mk0MC+7vw6hjdFpo OihgLTrIesf0g8gr8xGO/VQO3kW0aSrY9YrK1Dn2SCY5xWun3cBX5yCpaz5VGEV0r8fPI1Ay RAXACscMSGfrL6k+7GmE85JnNobC+3NE7pK7xmMzRmBZRonaZXKQqGM7t5ExjYgwMtJGJ4yZ eJAN2ApNk6ZJUQSZBFOUslWcOSA3xETdxVxrl6PqLVxyG/U1AFri5DmMcbPe8zMTsJQ9qqdj juepTWlXU1AbrRzzxK/6E6p37TvuRn9d5AvNJSK2vM7rVmMkzl75Bo+CgLg/KjRZlSFc8JSL QkY9zQjqYA29Ve3VZ/tUhugunmGsxUAHd1KHIUSyiuA167V6AaxHXUfQ3hKb9lOnNAybSwn0 BmOhdyBONB0mOTLEzTHrO7S9G7sf3FPdgfueBPoUyMe8obSvKpvnCnMU49ENbSrtvrRPx7Jl mXiQDcFu1kDsSIa//zlogGW02Lw+sihoh0dvVuOAD/8hu9tTMv8PtHztwCGhRpVBNzBJmRtq kTojCR3AAomKZiW3BKAT+wWdF1Cz6bUaWaM6bKD8nRIythMx5JAVdoKiN2GDB01WvvogBewC KMphStf5YVIIFyhZrJtboS6BqwClPawTY28Cq6LMIoQPPCdkTNrGgk0PSZ8OEiz+HXAbIllY cvLGSpSJS1y5VtbIMqeGL5GjO5DKtEWzmLPX5HrpymaPU6lTCfNE98taQLeBt3VGYvY+G05B f4DbZrVo/ieOcWiChTqHXk7dg5acCdnXcmu8qS6tIere2JbJY3oMNeJqZtJRmCvt/89ejvgl p1lZnJl9Q== IronPort-HdrOrdr: A9a23:+cP47q4NcKzEWJgocAPXwAzXdLJyesId70hD6qkQc3Fom62j5q WTdZEgvyMc5wx/ZJhNo7690cq7MBHhHPxOgbX5VI3KNGXbUQOTR72KhrGSoAEIdReeygZcv5 0QCZSXCrfLfCVHZRCR2njFLz4iquP3j5xBnY3lvhNQpZkBUdAZ0+9+YDzrdXFedU19KrcSMo GT3cZDryrIQwVtUizqbkN1OdQqvrfw5evbXSI= X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.98,301,1673931600"; d="scan'208";a="102947422" From: Andrew Cooper To: Xen-devel CC: Andrew Cooper , Jan Beulich , =?utf-8?q?Roger_Pau_Monn=C3=A9?= , Wei Liu Subject: [PATCH 8/9] x86: Drop struct old_cpu_policy Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2023 21:51:36 +0100 Message-ID: <20230329205137.323253-9-andrew.cooper3@citrix.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.30.2 In-Reply-To: <20230329205137.323253-1-andrew.cooper3@citrix.com> References: <20230329205137.323253-1-andrew.cooper3@citrix.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 With all the complicated callers of x86_cpu_policies_are_compatible() updated to use a single cpu_policy object, we can drop the final user of struct old_cpu_policy. Update x86_cpu_policies_are_compatible() to take (new) cpu_policy pointers, reducing the amount of internal pointer chasing, and update all callers to pass their cpu_policy objects directly. Signed-off-by: Andrew Cooper --- CC: Jan Beulich CC: Roger Pau Monné CC: Wei Liu --- tools/libs/guest/xg_cpuid_x86.c | 4 +-- tools/tests/cpu-policy/test-cpu-policy.c | 40 ++++++------------------ xen/arch/x86/domctl.c | 7 ++--- xen/include/xen/lib/x86/cpu-policy.h | 12 ++----- xen/lib/x86/policy.c | 12 +++---- 5 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 53 deletions(-) diff --git a/tools/libs/guest/xg_cpuid_x86.c b/tools/libs/guest/xg_cpuid_x86.c index 5061fe357767..14c00304c03c 100644 --- a/tools/libs/guest/xg_cpuid_x86.c +++ b/tools/libs/guest/xg_cpuid_x86.c @@ -868,9 +868,7 @@ bool xc_cpu_policy_is_compatible(xc_interface *xch, xc_cpu_policy_t *host, xc_cpu_policy_t *guest) { struct cpu_policy_errors err = INIT_CPU_POLICY_ERRORS; - struct old_cpu_policy h = { &host->policy, &host->policy }; - struct old_cpu_policy g = { &guest->policy, &guest->policy }; - int rc = x86_cpu_policies_are_compatible(&h, &g, &err); + int rc = x86_cpu_policies_are_compatible(&host->policy, &host->policy, &err); if ( !rc ) return true; diff --git a/tools/tests/cpu-policy/test-cpu-policy.c b/tools/tests/cpu-policy/test-cpu-policy.c index 909d6272f875..5b38702b1c62 100644 --- a/tools/tests/cpu-policy/test-cpu-policy.c +++ b/tools/tests/cpu-policy/test-cpu-policy.c @@ -574,23 +574,20 @@ static void test_is_compatible_success(void) { static struct test { const char *name; - struct cpuid_policy host_cpuid; - struct cpuid_policy guest_cpuid; - struct msr_policy host_msr; - struct msr_policy guest_msr; + struct cpu_policy host, guest; } tests[] = { { .name = "Host CPUID faulting, Guest not", - .host_msr = { + .host = { .platform_info.cpuid_faulting = true, }, }, { .name = "Host CPUID faulting, Guest wanted", - .host_msr = { + .host = { .platform_info.cpuid_faulting = true, }, - .guest_msr = { + .guest = { .platform_info.cpuid_faulting = true, }, }, @@ -602,15 +599,8 @@ static void test_is_compatible_success(void) for ( size_t i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(tests); ++i ) { struct test *t = &tests[i]; - struct old_cpu_policy sys = { - &t->host_cpuid, - &t->host_msr, - }, new = { - &t->guest_cpuid, - &t->guest_msr, - }; struct cpu_policy_errors e; - int res = x86_cpu_policies_are_compatible(&sys, &new, &e); + int res = x86_cpu_policies_are_compatible(&t->host, &t->guest, &e); /* Check the expected error output. */ if ( res != 0 || memcmp(&no_errors, &e, sizeof(no_errors)) ) @@ -624,25 +614,22 @@ static void test_is_compatible_failure(void) { static struct test { const char *name; - struct cpuid_policy host_cpuid; - struct cpuid_policy guest_cpuid; - struct msr_policy host_msr; - struct msr_policy guest_msr; + struct cpu_policy host, guest; struct cpu_policy_errors e; } tests[] = { { .name = "Host basic.max_leaf out of range", - .guest_cpuid.basic.max_leaf = 1, + .guest.basic.max_leaf = 1, .e = { 0, -1, -1 }, }, { .name = "Host extd.max_leaf out of range", - .guest_cpuid.extd.max_leaf = 1, + .guest.extd.max_leaf = 1, .e = { 0x80000000, -1, -1 }, }, { .name = "Host no CPUID faulting, Guest wanted", - .guest_msr = { + .guest = { .platform_info.cpuid_faulting = true, }, .e = { -1, -1, 0xce }, @@ -654,15 +641,8 @@ static void test_is_compatible_failure(void) for ( size_t i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(tests); ++i ) { struct test *t = &tests[i]; - struct old_cpu_policy sys = { - &t->host_cpuid, - &t->host_msr, - }, new = { - &t->guest_cpuid, - &t->guest_msr, - }; struct cpu_policy_errors e; - int res = x86_cpu_policies_are_compatible(&sys, &new, &e); + int res = x86_cpu_policies_are_compatible(&t->host, &t->guest, &e); /* Check the expected error output. */ if ( res == 0 || memcmp(&t->e, &e, sizeof(t->e)) ) diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/domctl.c b/xen/arch/x86/domctl.c index 81be25c67731..c02528594102 100644 --- a/xen/arch/x86/domctl.c +++ b/xen/arch/x86/domctl.c @@ -41,10 +41,9 @@ static int update_domain_cpu_policy(struct domain *d, xen_domctl_cpu_policy_t *xdpc) { struct cpu_policy *new; - struct cpu_policy *sys = is_pv_domain(d) + const struct cpu_policy *sys = is_pv_domain(d) ? (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_PV) ? &pv_max_cpu_policy : NULL) : (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_HVM) ? &hvm_max_cpu_policy : NULL); - struct old_cpu_policy old_sys = { sys, sys }, old_new; struct cpu_policy_errors err = INIT_CPU_POLICY_ERRORS; int ret = -ENOMEM; @@ -58,8 +57,6 @@ static int update_domain_cpu_policy(struct domain *d, if ( !(new = xmemdup(d->arch.cpu_policy)) ) goto out; - old_new = (struct old_cpu_policy){ new, new }; - /* Merge the toolstack provided data. */ if ( (ret = x86_cpuid_copy_from_buffer( new, xdpc->leaves, xdpc->nr_leaves, @@ -72,7 +69,7 @@ static int update_domain_cpu_policy(struct domain *d, x86_cpuid_policy_clear_out_of_range_leaves(new); /* Audit the combined dataset. */ - ret = x86_cpu_policies_are_compatible(&old_sys, &old_new, &err); + ret = x86_cpu_policies_are_compatible(sys, new, &err); if ( ret ) goto out; diff --git a/xen/include/xen/lib/x86/cpu-policy.h b/xen/include/xen/lib/x86/cpu-policy.h index 5af756a02da0..51f88f1e217e 100644 --- a/xen/include/xen/lib/x86/cpu-policy.h +++ b/xen/include/xen/lib/x86/cpu-policy.h @@ -379,12 +379,6 @@ struct cpu_policy #define cpuid_policy cpu_policy #define msr_policy cpu_policy -struct old_cpu_policy -{ - struct cpuid_policy *cpuid; - struct msr_policy *msr; -}; - struct cpu_policy_errors { uint32_t leaf, subleaf; @@ -559,7 +553,7 @@ int x86_msr_copy_from_buffer(struct msr_policy *policy, const msr_entry_buffer_t msrs, uint32_t nr_entries, uint32_t *err_msr); -/* +/** * Calculate whether two policies are compatible. * * i.e. Can a VM configured with @guest run on a CPU supporting @host. @@ -573,8 +567,8 @@ int x86_msr_copy_from_buffer(struct msr_policy *policy, * incompatibility is detected, the optional err pointer may identify the * problematic leaf/subleaf and/or MSR. */ -int x86_cpu_policies_are_compatible(const struct old_cpu_policy *host, - const struct old_cpu_policy *guest, +int x86_cpu_policies_are_compatible(const struct cpu_policy *host, + const struct cpu_policy *guest, struct cpu_policy_errors *err); #endif /* !XEN_LIB_X86_POLICIES_H */ diff --git a/xen/lib/x86/policy.c b/xen/lib/x86/policy.c index 2975711d7c6c..a9c60000af9d 100644 --- a/xen/lib/x86/policy.c +++ b/xen/lib/x86/policy.c @@ -2,8 +2,8 @@ #include -int x86_cpu_policies_are_compatible(const struct old_cpu_policy *host, - const struct old_cpu_policy *guest, +int x86_cpu_policies_are_compatible(const struct cpu_policy *host, + const struct cpu_policy *guest, struct cpu_policy_errors *err) { struct cpu_policy_errors e = INIT_CPU_POLICY_ERRORS; @@ -15,18 +15,18 @@ int x86_cpu_policies_are_compatible(const struct old_cpu_policy *host, #define FAIL_MSR(m) \ do { e.msr = (m); goto out; } while ( 0 ) - if ( guest->cpuid->basic.max_leaf > host->cpuid->basic.max_leaf ) + if ( guest->basic.max_leaf > host->basic.max_leaf ) FAIL_CPUID(0, NA); - if ( guest->cpuid->feat.max_subleaf > host->cpuid->feat.max_subleaf ) + if ( guest->feat.max_subleaf > host->feat.max_subleaf ) FAIL_CPUID(7, 0); - if ( guest->cpuid->extd.max_leaf > host->cpuid->extd.max_leaf ) + if ( guest->extd.max_leaf > host->extd.max_leaf ) FAIL_CPUID(0x80000000, NA); /* TODO: Audit more CPUID data. */ - if ( ~host->msr->platform_info.raw & guest->msr->platform_info.raw ) + if ( ~host->platform_info.raw & guest->platform_info.raw ) FAIL_MSR(MSR_INTEL_PLATFORM_INFO); #undef FAIL_MSR