qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 7/7] KVM regsync: Fix do_kvm_cpu_synchronize_sta


From: Bhushan Bharat-R65777
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 7/7] KVM regsync: Fix do_kvm_cpu_synchronize_state data integrity issue
Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2013 14:43:21 +0000


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jason J. Herne [mailto:address@hidden
> Sent: Friday, January 04, 2013 11:10 PM
> To: Alexander Graf
> Cc: Christian Borntraeger; Anthony Liguori; Marcelo Tosatti; qemu-
> address@hidden qemu-devel; Bhushan Bharat-R65777
> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 7/7] KVM regsync: Fix
> do_kvm_cpu_synchronize_state data integrity issue
> 
> On 01/04/2013 11:27 AM, Alexander Graf wrote:
> >
> > On 04.01.2013, at 16:25, Jason J. Herne wrote:
> >
> >> If I've followed the conversation correctly this is what needs to be done:
> >>
> >> 1. Remove the level parameters from kvm_arch_get_registers and
> kvm_arch_put_registers.
> >>
> >> 2. Add a new bitmap parameter to kvm_arch_get_registers and
> kvm_arch_put_registers.
> >
> > I would combine these into "replace levels with bitmap".
> >
> >> 3. Define a bit that correlates to our current notion of "all runtime
> registers".  This bit, and all bits in this bitmap, would be architecture
> specific.
> >
> > Why would that bit be architecture specific? "All runtime registers" ==
> "registers that gdb can access" IIRC. The implementation on what exactly that
> means obviously is architecture specific, but the bit itself would not be, as
> the gdbstub wants to be able to synchronize in arch independent code.
> >
> >> 4. Remove the cpustate->kvm_sync_dirty field.  Replace it with a bitmap 
> >> that
> tracks which bits are dirty and need to be synced back to KVM-land.
> >>
> >> 5. As we do today, we'll assume registers are dirty and turn on their
> corresponding bit in this new bitmap whenever we "get" the registers from KVM.
> >
> > Yes. Changing these semantics is nothing for today :).
> >
> >> 6. Add other bits as needed on a case by case basis.
> >>
> >> Does this seem to match what was discussed, and what we want to do?
> >
> > It's probably the best way forward, keeping everyone happy.
> >
> > Please coordinate with Bharat on who actually wants to sit down to implement
> this. Or if you're quick you might be able to beat him to it regardless thanks
> to time zones :).
> >
> 
> Hi Bharat,
> 
> How would you like to handle these changes?  I can do them, or you could if 
> you
> prefer. Please let me know.

Hi Jason,

I will be happy to see the patch from you and because of some other things if 
you think that it will take time then let me know, I will do the changes. This 
framework will be used by my watchdog patches and only thing I want is my 
watchdog changes get pushed in QEMU.

Thanks
-Bharat





reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]