All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Xiao Guangrong <xiaoguangrong@cn.fujitsu.com>
To: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
Cc: Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	KVM list <kvm@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 5/6] KVM: MMU: combine guest pte read between walk and pte prefetch
Date: Mon, 05 Jul 2010 16:45:47 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4C319BBB.5020408@cn.fujitsu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4C319699.9000104@redhat.com>



Avi Kivity wrote:

>> Looks into the code more carefully, maybe this code is wrong:
>>
>>
>>               if (!direct) {
>>                       r = kvm_read_guest_atomic(vcpu->kvm,
>> -                                          gw->pte_gpa[level - 2],
>> +                                          gw->pte_gpa[level - 1],
>>                                        &curr_pte, sizeof(curr_pte));
>> -                    if (r || curr_pte != gw->ptes[level - 2]) {
>> +                    if (r || curr_pte != gw->ptes[level - 1]) {
>>                                  kvm_mmu_put_page(sp, sptep);
>>                                  kvm_release_pfn_clean(pfn);
>>                                  sptep = NULL;
>>
>> It should check the 'level' mapping not 'level - 1', in the later
>> description
>> i'll explain it.
>>    
> 
> Right, this fixes the check for the top level, but it removes a check
> from the bottom level.
> 

We no need check the bottom level if guest not modify the bottom level,
if guest modify it, the bottom level is no-present, it also can broke
Point A's judgment and be checked by 'Point C'

> We need to move this to the top of the loop so we check all levels.  I
> guess this is why you needed to add a new check point.  But since we
> loop at least glevels times, we don't need two check points.
> 
  
> 
> Ok.   So moving the check to before point A, and s/level - 2/level - 1/
> should work, yes?
> 
> Should be slightly simpler since we don't need to kvm_mmu_put_page(sp,
> sptep) any more.

Yeah, it can work, but check all levels is really unnecessary, if guest not
modify the level, the check can be avoid.

This is why i choose two check-point, one is behind Point A's judgment, this
point checks the level which modified by guest, and another point is at mapping
last level point, this check is alway need.

> 
> Thanks for the detailed explanation.
> 

It's really my pleasure :-)


  reply	other threads:[~2010-07-05  8:49 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-07-01 13:53 [PATCH v4 1/6] KVM: MMU: introduce gfn_to_pfn_atomic() function Xiao Guangrong
2010-07-01 13:53 ` [PATCH v4 2/6] KVM: MMU: introduce gfn_to_page_many_atomic() function Xiao Guangrong
2010-07-01 13:54 ` [PATCH v4 3/6] KVM: MMU: introduce pte_prefetch_topup_memory_cache() Xiao Guangrong
2010-07-01 13:55 ` [PATCH v4 4/6] KVM: MMU: prefetch ptes when intercepted guest #PF Xiao Guangrong
2010-07-02 16:54   ` Marcelo Tosatti
2010-07-03  8:08     ` Xiao Guangrong
2010-07-05 12:01       ` Marcelo Tosatti
2010-07-06  0:50         ` Xiao Guangrong
2010-07-01 13:55 ` [PATCH v4 5/6] KVM: MMU: combine guest pte read between walk and pte prefetch Xiao Guangrong
2010-07-02 17:03   ` Marcelo Tosatti
2010-07-03 10:31     ` Xiao Guangrong
2010-07-03 12:08       ` Avi Kivity
2010-07-03 12:16         ` Xiao Guangrong
2010-07-03 12:26           ` Avi Kivity
2010-07-03 12:31             ` Xiao Guangrong
2010-07-03 12:44               ` Avi Kivity
2010-07-03 12:49                 ` Avi Kivity
2010-07-03 13:03                   ` Xiao Guangrong
2010-07-04 14:30                     ` Avi Kivity
2010-07-05  2:52                       ` Xiao Guangrong
2010-07-05  8:23                         ` Avi Kivity
2010-07-05  8:45                           ` Xiao Guangrong [this message]
2010-07-05  9:05                             ` Avi Kivity
2010-07-05  9:09                               ` Xiao Guangrong
2010-07-05  9:20                                 ` Avi Kivity
2010-07-05  9:31                                   ` Xiao Guangrong
2010-07-03 12:57                 ` Xiao Guangrong
2010-07-04 14:32                   ` Avi Kivity
2010-07-03 11:48     ` Avi Kivity
2010-07-01 13:56 ` [PATCH v4 6/6] KVM: MMU: trace " Xiao Guangrong
2010-07-02 16:47 ` [PATCH v4 1/6] KVM: MMU: introduce gfn_to_pfn_atomic() function Marcelo Tosatti
2010-07-03  3:13   ` Nick Piggin

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=4C319BBB.5020408@cn.fujitsu.com \
    --to=xiaoguangrong@cn.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=avi@redhat.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mtosatti@redhat.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.