Add 5-argument handling for paravirt ops patching of PAE functions. Signed-off-by: Zachary Amsden <zach@vmware.com> diff -r dbe11208916f include/asm-i386/paravirt.h --- a/include/asm-i386/paravirt.h Thu Apr 19 11:40:55 2007 -0700 +++ b/include/asm-i386/paravirt.h Thu Apr 19 12:04:16 2007 -0700 @@ -308,10 +308,9 @@ unsigned paravirt_patch_insns(void *site * return value handling from within these macros. This is fairly * cumbersome. * - * There are 5 sets of PVOP_* macros for dealing with 0-4 arguments. - * It could be extended to more arguments, but there would be little - * to be gained from that. For each number of arguments, there are - * the two VCALL and CALL variants for void and non-void functions. + * There are 5 sets of PVOP_* macros for dealing with 0-5 arguments. + * For each number of arguments, there are the two VCALL and CALL + * variants for void and non-void functions. * * When there is a return value, the invoker of the macro must specify * the return type. The macro then uses sizeof() on that type to @@ -405,6 +404,21 @@ unsigned paravirt_patch_insns(void *site "0" ((u32)(arg1)), "1" ((u32)(arg2)), \ "2" ((u32)(arg3)), [_arg4] "mr" ((u32)(arg4))) +#define PVOP_CALL5(rettype, op, arg1, arg2, arg3, arg4, arg5) \ + __PVOP_CALL(rettype, op, \ + "push %[_arg5]; push %[_arg4];", \ + "lea 8(%%esp),%%esp;", \ + "0" ((u32)(arg1)), "1" ((u32)(arg2)), \ + "2" ((u32)(arg3)), [_arg4] "mr" ((u32)(arg4)), \ + [_arg5] "mr" ((u32)(arg5))) +#define PVOP_VCALL5(op, arg1, arg2, arg3, arg4, arg5) \ + __PVOP_VCALL(op, \ + "push %[_arg5]; push %[_arg4];", \ + "lea 8(%%esp),%%esp;", \ + "0" ((u32)(arg1)), "1" ((u32)(arg2)), \ + "2" ((u32)(arg3)), [_arg4] "mr" ((u32)(arg4)), \ + [_arg5] "mr" ((u32)(arg5))) + static inline int paravirt_enabled(void) { return paravirt_ops.paravirt_enabled; @@ -644,11 +658,11 @@ static inline void set_iopl_mask(unsigne /* The paravirtualized I/O functions */ static inline void slow_down_io(void) { - paravirt_ops.io_delay(); + PVOP_VCALL0(io_delay); #ifdef REALLY_SLOW_IO - paravirt_ops.io_delay(); - paravirt_ops.io_delay(); - paravirt_ops.io_delay(); + PVOP_VCALL0(io_delay); + PVOP_VCALL0(io_delay); + PVOP_VCALL0(io_delay); #endif } @@ -824,8 +838,7 @@ static inline void set_pte_at(struct mm_ static inline void set_pte_at(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long addr, pte_t *ptep, pte_t pteval) { - /* 5 arg words */ - paravirt_ops.set_pte_at(mm, addr, ptep, pteval); + PVOP_VCALL5(mm, addr, ptep, pteval.pte_low, pteval.pte_high); } static inline void set_pte_atomic(pte_t *ptep, pte_t pteval) @@ -836,8 +849,7 @@ static inline void set_pte_present(struc static inline void set_pte_present(struct mm_struct *mm, unsigned long addr, pte_t *ptep, pte_t pte) { - /* 5 arg words */ - paravirt_ops.set_pte_present(mm, addr, ptep, pte); + PVOP_VCALL5(mm, addr, ptep, pte.pte_low, pte.pte_high); } static inline void set_pmd(pmd_t *pmdp, pmd_t pmdval)
On Thu, 2007-04-19 at 18:52 -0700, Zachary Amsden wrote:> Add 5-argument handling for paravirt ops patching of PAE functions.This seems like overkill: I don't know of any modules which frob ptes... The rest look fine (I particularly like the getting rid of kernel_rpl: we didn't use it everywhere anyway). Cheers, Rusty.
Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2007-Apr-19 21:35 UTC
[RFC, PATCH 1/5] Paravirt_ops full patching.patch
Zachary Amsden wrote:> Add 5-argument handling for paravirt ops patching of PAE functions. > > Signed-off-by: Zachary Amsden <zach@vmware.com> > > diff -r dbe11208916f include/asm-i386/paravirt.h > --- a/include/asm-i386/paravirt.h Thu Apr 19 11:40:55 2007 -0700 > +++ b/include/asm-i386/paravirt.h Thu Apr 19 12:04:16 2007 -0700 > @@ -308,10 +308,9 @@ unsigned paravirt_patch_insns(void *site > * return value handling from within these macros. This is fairly > * cumbersome. > * > - * There are 5 sets of PVOP_* macros for dealing with 0-4 arguments. > - * It could be extended to more arguments, but there would be little > - * to be gained from that. For each number of arguments, there are > - * the two VCALL and CALL variants for void and non-void functions. > + * There are 5 sets of PVOP_* macros for dealing with 0-5 arguments. > + * For each number of arguments, there are the two VCALL and CALL > + * variants for void and non-void functions. > * > * When there is a return value, the invoker of the macro must specify > * the return type. The macro then uses sizeof() on that type to > @@ -405,6 +404,21 @@ unsigned paravirt_patch_insns(void *site > "0" ((u32)(arg1)), "1" ((u32)(arg2)), \ > "2" ((u32)(arg3)), [_arg4] "mr" ((u32)(arg4))) > > +#define PVOP_CALL5(rettype, op, arg1, arg2, arg3, arg4, arg5) \ > + __PVOP_CALL(rettype, op, \ > + "push %[_arg5]; push %[_arg4];", \ > + "lea 8(%%esp),%%esp;", \ > + "0" ((u32)(arg1)), "1" ((u32)(arg2)), \ > + "2" ((u32)(arg3)), [_arg4] "mr" ((u32)(arg4)), \ > + [_arg5] "mr" ((u32)(arg5))) >Won't work if arg4 is a stack-relative addressing mode. That was the main reason I avoided 5-arg patching. I guess using "r" as the arg4 constraint would work, but register pressure is getting pretty tight. J
Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2007-Apr-19 21:43 UTC
[RFC, PATCH 1/5] Paravirt_ops full patching.patch
Zachary Amsden wrote:> - * There are 5 sets of PVOP_* macros for dealing with 0-4 arguments. > - * It could be extended to more arguments, but there would be little > - * to be gained from that. For each number of arguments, there are > - * the two VCALL and CALL variants for void and non-void functions. > + * There are 5 sets of PVOP_* macros for dealing with 0-5 arguments. >s/5/6/ J
Maybe Matching Threads
- [RFC, PATCH 1/5] Paravirt_ops full patching.patch
- [PATCH] paravirt_ops: Clean up paravirt patchable wrappers
- [PATCH] paravirt_ops: Clean up paravirt patchable wrappers
- [RFC, PATCH 3/5] Paravirt_ops pure functions.patch
- [RFC, PATCH 3/5] Paravirt_ops pure functions.patch