From: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
Thomas Huth <thuth@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: cornelia.huck@de.ibm.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, agraf@suse.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 1/1] KVM: s390: Add MEMOP ioctl for reading/writing guest memory
Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2015 12:25:04 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <54D20190.9060201@de.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <54D1F6E2.1040201@redhat.com>
Am 04.02.2015 um 11:39 schrieb Paolo Bonzini:
>> Conny:
>> I am asking myself, if we should explicitly add a comment in the
>> virtio-ccw spec, that all accesses are assumed to be with key 0 and
>> thus never cause key protection. The change/reference bit is set
>> by the underlying I/O or memory copy anyway.
>
> Can you explain the last sentence? :)
Whenever vhost or qemu or a finished aio request wrote content into a
virtio buffer, the HW has set the storage key for that physical page,
which makes it automatically dirty/referenced in the guest visible
storage key.
For completeness sake:
Now, if the guest does not use the storage key, but instead the new fault
based software dirty tracking, it wont notice the change bit. The guest
I/O itself when finished will mark the struct page as Dirty, just like on
x86.
Makes sense?
Christian
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
Thomas Huth <thuth@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: cornelia.huck@de.ibm.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, agraf@suse.de
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH RFC 1/1] KVM: s390: Add MEMOP ioctl for reading/writing guest memory
Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2015 12:25:04 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <54D20190.9060201@de.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <54D1F6E2.1040201@redhat.com>
Am 04.02.2015 um 11:39 schrieb Paolo Bonzini:
>> Conny:
>> I am asking myself, if we should explicitly add a comment in the
>> virtio-ccw spec, that all accesses are assumed to be with key 0 and
>> thus never cause key protection. The change/reference bit is set
>> by the underlying I/O or memory copy anyway.
>
> Can you explain the last sentence? :)
Whenever vhost or qemu or a finished aio request wrote content into a
virtio buffer, the HW has set the storage key for that physical page,
which makes it automatically dirty/referenced in the guest visible
storage key.
For completeness sake:
Now, if the guest does not use the storage key, but instead the new fault
based software dirty tracking, it wont notice the change bit. The guest
I/O itself when finished will mark the struct page as Dirty, just like on
x86.
Makes sense?
Christian
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-02-04 11:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-02-03 12:11 [PATCH RFC 0/1] KVM: ioctl for reading/writing guest memory Thomas Huth
2015-02-03 12:11 ` [Qemu-devel] " Thomas Huth
2015-02-03 12:11 ` [PATCH RFC 1/1] KVM: s390: Add MEMOP " Thomas Huth
2015-02-03 12:11 ` [Qemu-devel] " Thomas Huth
2015-02-03 13:04 ` Paolo Bonzini
2015-02-03 13:04 ` [Qemu-devel] " Paolo Bonzini
2015-02-03 15:16 ` Thomas Huth
2015-02-03 15:16 ` [Qemu-devel] " Thomas Huth
2015-02-03 15:22 ` Paolo Bonzini
2015-02-03 15:22 ` [Qemu-devel] " Paolo Bonzini
2015-02-04 7:53 ` Thomas Huth
2015-02-04 7:53 ` [Qemu-devel] " Thomas Huth
2015-02-04 8:26 ` Christian Borntraeger
2015-02-04 8:26 ` [Qemu-devel] " Christian Borntraeger
2015-02-04 10:39 ` Paolo Bonzini
2015-02-04 10:39 ` [Qemu-devel] " Paolo Bonzini
2015-02-04 11:25 ` Christian Borntraeger [this message]
2015-02-04 11:25 ` Christian Borntraeger
2015-02-04 11:42 ` Paolo Bonzini
2015-02-04 11:42 ` [Qemu-devel] " Paolo Bonzini
2015-02-04 12:16 ` Christian Borntraeger
2015-02-04 12:16 ` [Qemu-devel] " Christian Borntraeger
2015-02-04 10:57 ` Thomas Huth
2015-02-04 10:57 ` [Qemu-devel] " Thomas Huth
2015-02-05 13:00 ` Cornelia Huck
2015-02-05 13:00 ` [Qemu-devel] " Cornelia Huck
2015-02-03 12:59 ` [PATCH RFC 0/1] KVM: " Paolo Bonzini
2015-02-03 12:59 ` [Qemu-devel] " Paolo Bonzini
2015-02-03 13:05 ` Christian Borntraeger
2015-02-03 13:05 ` [Qemu-devel] " Christian Borntraeger
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=54D20190.9060201@de.ibm.com \
--to=borntraeger@de.ibm.com \
--cc=agraf@suse.de \
--cc=cornelia.huck@de.ibm.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=thuth@linux.vnet.ibm.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.