Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Fri, 26 Feb 2010 15:10:13 +0200 | | From | Avi Kivity <> | | Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/5] KVM: SVM: Optimize nested svm msrpm merging |
| |
On 02/26/2010 03:04 PM, Joerg Roedel wrote: > >> I'm still not convinced on this way of doing things. If it's static, >> make it static. If it's dynamic, make it dynamic. Dynamically >> generating a static list just sounds plain wrong to me. >> > Stop. I had a static list in the first version of the patch. This list > was fine except the fact that a developer needs to remember to update > this list if the list of non-intercepted msrs is expanded. The whole > reason for a dynamically built list is to take the task of maintaining > the list away from the developer and remove a possible source of hard to > find bugs. This is what the current approach does. >
The problem was the two lists. If you had a
static struct svm_direct_access_msrs = { u32 index; bool longmode_only; } direct_access_msrs = { ... }; You could generate
static unsigned *msrpm_offsets_longmode, *msrpm_offsets_legacy;
as well as the original bitmaps at module init, no?
-- Do not meddle in the internals of kernels, for they are subtle and quick to panic.
|  |