Commit 9b6efcd2 authored by Rusty Russell's avatar Rusty Russell

lguest: update comments to reflect LHCALL_LOAD_GDT_ENTRY.

We used to have a hypercall which reloaded the entire GDT, then we
switched to one which loaded a single entry (to match the IDT code).

Some comments were not updated, so fix them.
Signed-off-by: default avatarRusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Reported by: Eviatar Khen <eviatarkhen@gmail.com>
parent 65745422
......@@ -324,9 +324,8 @@ static void lguest_load_gdt(const struct desc_ptr *desc)
}
/*
* For a single GDT entry which changes, we do the lazy thing: alter our GDT,
* then tell the Host to reload the entire thing. This operation is so rare
* that this naive implementation is reasonable.
* For a single GDT entry which changes, we simply change our copy and
* then tell the host about it.
*/
static void lguest_write_gdt_entry(struct desc_struct *dt, int entrynum,
const void *desc, int type)
......@@ -338,9 +337,13 @@ static void lguest_write_gdt_entry(struct desc_struct *dt, int entrynum,
}
/*
* OK, I lied. There are three "thread local storage" GDT entries which change
* There are three "thread local storage" GDT entries which change
* on every context switch (these three entries are how glibc implements
* __thread variables). So we have a hypercall specifically for this case.
* __thread variables). As an optimization, we have a hypercall
* specifically for this case.
*
* Wouldn't it be nicer to have a general LOAD_GDT_ENTRIES hypercall
* which took a range of entries?
*/
static void lguest_load_tls(struct thread_struct *t, unsigned int cpu)
{
......
Markdown is supported
0%
or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment