On 01/07/2020 17:06, Andrew Cooper wrote:
On 01/07/2020 16:12, Julien Grall wrote:
On 30/06/2020 13:33, Michał Leszczyński wrote:
@@ -305,7 +311,6 @@ static int vmx_init_vmcs_config(void)
SECONDARY_EXEC_ENABLE_VIRT_EXCEPTIONS |
SECONDARY_EXEC_XSAVES |
SECONDARY_EXEC_TSC_SCALING);
- rdmsrl(MSR_IA32_VMX_MISC, _vmx_misc_cap);
if ( _vmx_misc_cap & VMX_MISC_VMWRITE_ALL )
opt |= SECONDARY_EXEC_ENABLE_VMCS_SHADOWING;
if ( opt_vpid_enabled )
diff --git a/xen/common/domain.c b/xen/common/domain.c
index 7cc9526139..0a33e0dfd6 100644
--- a/xen/common/domain.c
+++ b/xen/common/domain.c
@@ -82,6 +82,8 @@ struct vcpu *idle_vcpu[NR_CPUS] __read_mostly;
vcpu_info_t dummy_vcpu_info;
+bool_t vmtrace_supported;
All the code looks x86 specific. So may I ask why this was implemented
in common code?
There were some questions directed specifically at the ARM maintainers
about CoreSight, which have gone unanswered.
I can only find one question related to the size. Is there any other?
I don't know how the interface will look like given that AFAICT the
buffer may be embedded in the HW. We would need to investigate how to
differentiate between two domUs in this case without impacting the
performance in the common code.
So I think it is a little premature to implement this in common code and
always compiled in for Arm. It would be best if this stay in x86 code.
Cheers,
--
Julien Grall
