All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Xiao Guangrong <xiaoguangrong@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Gleb Natapov <gleb@redhat.com>
Cc: Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, KVM <kvm@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 5/5] KVM: x86: improve reexecute_instruction
Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2013 15:55:03 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <50E68AD7.9010008@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20121223150217.GS17584@redhat.com>

Hi Gleb,

Thanks for your review and sorry for the delay reply since i was on my vacation.

On 12/23/2012 11:02 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 03:01:12PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:

>>
>> +	is_self_change_mapping = FNAME(is_self_change_mapping)(vcpu, addr,
>> +				       &walker, user_fault);
>> +
> is_self_change_mapping() has a subtle side-effect by setting
> vcpu->arch.target_gfn_is_pt. From reading the page_fault() function
> you cannot guess why is_self_change_mapping() is not called inside "if
> (walker.level >= PT_DIRECTORY_LEVEL)" since this is the only place where
> its output is used. May be pass it pointer to target_gfn_is_pt as a
> parameter to make it clear that return value is not the only output of
> the function.

Yes, it is clearer, will do it in the next version.

> 
>>  	if (walker.level >= PT_DIRECTORY_LEVEL)
>>  		force_pt_level = mapping_level_dirty_bitmap(vcpu, walker.gfn)
>> -		   || FNAME(is_self_change_mapping)(vcpu, &walker, user_fault);
>> +		   || is_self_change_mapping;
>>  	else
>>  		force_pt_level = 1;
>>  	if (!force_pt_level) {
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
>> index bf66169..fc33563 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
>> @@ -4756,29 +4756,25 @@ static int handle_emulation_failure(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
>>  static bool reexecute_instruction(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, unsigned long cr2)
>>  {
>>  	gpa_t gpa = cr2;
>> +	gfn_t gfn;
>>  	pfn_t pfn;
>> -	unsigned int indirect_shadow_pages;
>> -
>> -	spin_lock(&vcpu->kvm->mmu_lock);
>> -	indirect_shadow_pages = vcpu->kvm->arch.indirect_shadow_pages;
>> -	spin_unlock(&vcpu->kvm->mmu_lock);
>> -
>> -	if (!indirect_shadow_pages)
>> -		return false;
>>
>>  	if (!vcpu->arch.mmu.direct_map) {
>> -		gpa = kvm_mmu_gva_to_gpa_read(vcpu, cr2, NULL);
>> +		/*
>> +		 * Write permission should be allowed since only
>> +		 * write access need to be emulated.
>> +		 */
>> +		gpa = kvm_mmu_gva_to_gpa_write(vcpu, cr2, NULL);
>> +
>> +		/*
>> +		 * If the mapping is invalid in guest, let cpu retry
>> +		 * it to generate fault.
>> +		 */
>>  		if (gpa == UNMAPPED_GVA)
>> -			return true; /* let cpu generate fault */
>> +			return true;
>>  	}
> Why not fold this change to if (!vcpu->arch.mmu.direct_map) into
> previous patch where it was introduced. This looks independent of
> what you are doing in this patch.

Fine to me.

> 
>>
>> -	/*
>> -	 * if emulation was due to access to shadowed page table
>> -	 * and it failed try to unshadow page and re-enter the
>> -	 * guest to let CPU execute the instruction.
>> -	 */
>> -	if (kvm_mmu_unprotect_page(vcpu->kvm, gpa_to_gfn(gpa)))
>> -		return true;
>> +	gfn = gpa_to_gfn(gpa);
>>
>>  	/*
>>  	 * Do not retry the unhandleable instruction if it faults on the
>> @@ -4786,13 +4782,33 @@ static bool reexecute_instruction(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, unsigned long cr2)
>>  	 * retry instruction -> write #PF -> emulation fail -> retry
>>  	 * instruction -> ...
>>  	 */
>> -	pfn = gfn_to_pfn(vcpu->kvm, gpa_to_gfn(gpa));
>> -	if (!is_error_noslot_pfn(pfn)) {
>> -		kvm_release_pfn_clean(pfn);
>> +	pfn = gfn_to_pfn(vcpu->kvm, gfn);
>> +
>> +	/*
>> +	 * If the instruction failed on the error pfn, it can not be fixed,
>> +	 * report the error to userspace.
>> +	 */
>> +	if (is_error_noslot_pfn(pfn))
>> +		return false;
>> +
>> +	kvm_release_pfn_clean(pfn);
>> +
>> +	/* The instructions are well-emulated on direct mmu. */
>> +	if (vcpu->arch.mmu.direct_map) {
>> +		unsigned int indirect_shadow_pages;
>> +
>> +		spin_lock(&vcpu->kvm->mmu_lock);
>> +		indirect_shadow_pages = vcpu->kvm->arch.indirect_shadow_pages;
>> +		spin_unlock(&vcpu->kvm->mmu_lock);
>> +
>> +		if (indirect_shadow_pages)
>> +			kvm_mmu_unprotect_page(vcpu->kvm, gfn);
>> +
>>  		return true;
>>  	}
>>
>> -	return false;
>> +	kvm_mmu_unprotect_page(vcpu->kvm, gfn);
>> +	return !(vcpu->arch.fault_addr == cr2 && vcpu->arch.target_gfn_is_pt);
> Do you store fault_addr only to avoid using stale target_gfn_is_pt? If
> yes why not reset target_gfn_is_pt to false at the beginning of a page
> fault and get rid of fault_addr?

Good suggestion, will do. :)

      reply	other threads:[~2013-01-04  7:55 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-12-15  6:57 [PATCH v3 0/5] KVM: x86: improve reexecute_instruction Xiao Guangrong
2012-12-15  6:58 ` [PATCH v3 1/5] KVM: MMU: fix Dirty bit missed if CR0.WP = 0 Xiao Guangrong
2012-12-15  6:59 ` [PATCH v3 2/5] KVM: MMU: fix infinite fault access retry Xiao Guangrong
2012-12-15  6:59 ` [PATCH v3 3/5] KVM: x86: clean up reexecute_instruction Xiao Guangrong
2012-12-15  7:00 ` [PATCH v3 4/5] KVM: x86: let reexecute_instruction work for tdp Xiao Guangrong
2012-12-15  7:01 ` [PATCH v3 5/5] KVM: x86: improve reexecute_instruction Xiao Guangrong
2012-12-23 15:02   ` Gleb Natapov
2013-01-04  7:55     ` Xiao Guangrong [this message]

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=50E68AD7.9010008@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --to=xiaoguangrong@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=gleb@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.