Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 25 Apr 2019 10:19:31 +0200 | From | Peter Zijlstra <> | Subject | Re: [patch 3/3] x86/paravirt: Replace paravirt patch asm magic |
| |
On Thu, Apr 25, 2019 at 10:08:10AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Thu, Apr 25, 2019 at 08:52:09AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > -# ifdef CONFIG_PARAVIRT_XXL > > > -DEF_NATIVE(irq, irq_disable, "cli"); > > > -DEF_NATIVE(irq, irq_enable, "sti"); > > > -DEF_NATIVE(irq, restore_fl, "push %eax; popf"); > > > -DEF_NATIVE(irq, save_fl, "pushf; pop %eax"); > > > -DEF_NATIVE(cpu, iret, "iret"); > > > -DEF_NATIVE(mmu, read_cr2, "mov %cr2, %eax"); > > > -DEF_NATIVE(mmu, write_cr3, "mov %eax, %cr3"); > > > -DEF_NATIVE(mmu, read_cr3, "mov %cr3, %eax"); > > > > > +static const struct patch_xxl patch_data_xxl = { > > > + .irq_irq_disable = { 0xfa }, // cli > > > + .irq_irq_enable = { 0xfb }, // sti > > > + .irq_save_fl = { 0x9c, 0x58 }, // pushf; pop %[re]ax > > > + .mmu_read_cr2 = { 0x0f, 0x20, 0xd0 }, // mov %cr2, %[re]ax > > > + .mmu_read_cr3 = { 0x0f, 0x20, 0xd8 }, // mov %cr3, %[re]ax > > > +# ifdef CONFIG_X86_64 > > > + .irq_restore_fl = { 0x57, 0x9d }, // push %rdi; popfq > > > + .mmu_write_cr3 = { 0x0f, 0x22, 0xdf }, // mov %rdi, %cr3 > > > + .cpu_wbinvd = { 0x0f, 0x09 }, // wbinvd > > > + .cpu_usergs_sysret64 = { 0x0f, 0x01, 0xf8, > > > + 0x48, 0x0f, 0x07 }, // swapgs; sysretq > > > + .cpu_swapgs = { 0x0f, 0x01, 0xf8 }, // swapgs > > > + .mov64 = { 0x48, 0x89, 0xf8 }, // mov %rdi, %rax > > > +# else > > > + .irq_restore_fl = { 0x50, 0x9d }, // push %eax; popf > > > + .mmu_write_cr3 = { 0x0f, 0x22, 0xd8 }, // mov %eax, %cr3 > > > + .cpu_iret = { 0xcf }, // iret > > > +# endif > > > > I think these open-coded hexa versions are somewhat fragile as well, how > > about putting these into a .S file and controlling the sections in an LTO > > safe manner there? > > > > That will also allow us to write proper asm, and global labels can be > > used to extract the patchlets and their length? > > While I'm not fan either; I think that will be worse still, because it > splits the information over multiple files. > > The advantage of this form is that it is clear how long the instructions > are, which is important for the patching. These immediates have to be > shorter than 5 bytes because they overwrite the CALL/JMP to the paravirt > function. > > /me eyes .cpu_usergs_sysret64 and goes wtf..
OK, my bad, the indirect CALL/JMP is 6 bytes.. phew.
| |