Excerpts from Fabiano Rosas's message of July 1, 2021 3:51 am:
> Nicholas Piggin <npig...@gmail.com> writes:
> 
>> Some of the DAWR SPR access is already predicated on dawr_enabled(),
>> apply this to the remainder of the accesses.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Nicholas Piggin <npig...@gmail.com>
>> ---
>>  arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_hv_p9_entry.c | 34 ++++++++++++++++-----------
>>  1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_hv_p9_entry.c 
>> b/arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_hv_p9_entry.c
>> index 7aa72efcac6c..f305d1d6445c 100644
>> --- a/arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_hv_p9_entry.c
>> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_hv_p9_entry.c
>> @@ -638,13 +638,16 @@ int kvmhv_vcpu_entry_p9(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 
>> time_limit, unsigned long lpc
>>
>>      host_hfscr = mfspr(SPRN_HFSCR);
>>      host_ciabr = mfspr(SPRN_CIABR);
>> -    host_dawr0 = mfspr(SPRN_DAWR0);
>> -    host_dawrx0 = mfspr(SPRN_DAWRX0);
>>      host_psscr = mfspr(SPRN_PSSCR);
>>      host_pidr = mfspr(SPRN_PID);
>> -    if (cpu_has_feature(CPU_FTR_DAWR1)) {
>> -            host_dawr1 = mfspr(SPRN_DAWR1);
>> -            host_dawrx1 = mfspr(SPRN_DAWRX1);
>> +
>> +    if (dawr_enabled()) {
>> +            host_dawr0 = mfspr(SPRN_DAWR0);
>> +            host_dawrx0 = mfspr(SPRN_DAWRX0);
>> +            if (cpu_has_feature(CPU_FTR_DAWR1)) {
>> +                    host_dawr1 = mfspr(SPRN_DAWR1);
>> +                    host_dawrx1 = mfspr(SPRN_DAWRX1);
> 
> The userspace needs to enable DAWR1 via KVM_CAP_PPC_DAWR1. That cap is
> not even implemented in QEMU currently, so we never allow the guest to
> set vcpu->arch.dawr1. If we check for kvm->arch.dawr1_enabled instead of
> the CPU feature, we could shave some more time here.

Ah good point, yes let's do that.

Thanks,
Nick

Reply via email to