All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com>
To: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
Cc: kernel-team@android.com, catalin.marinas@arm.com,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, will@kernel.org,
	kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/7] KVM: arm64: Unify MMIO and mem host stage-2 pools
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2021 08:04:52 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YL3TJDlMNCyq7JK3@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <b4e4647166447d8fd22b360369de4acb@kernel.org>

On Sunday 06 Jun 2021 at 11:31:20 (+0100), Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On 2021-06-02 10:43, Quentin Perret wrote:
> > We currently maintain two separate memory pools for the host stage-2,
> > one for pages used in the page-table when mapping memory regions, and
> > the other to map MMIO regions. The former is large enough to map all of
> > memory with page granularity and the latter can cover an arbitrary
> > portion of IPA space, but allows to 'recycle' pages.
> > 
> > However, this split makes accounting difficult to manage as pages at
> > intermediate levels of the page-table may be used to map both memory and
> > MMIO regions. Simplify the scheme by merging both pools into one. This
> > means we can now hit the -ENOMEM case in the memory abort path, but
> > we're still guaranteed forward-progress in the worst case by unmapping
> > MMIO regions. On the plus side this also means we can usually map a lot
> > more MMIO space at once if memory ranges happen to be mapped with block
> > mappings.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com>
> 
> This patch fails to apply on top of -rc4. Did you use some more exotic
> base or, as I suspect, a development tree?
> 
> Please check and respin the series if necessary.

I used kvmarm/next, but clearly an out-of-date one. I'll respin -- sorry
about that.

Thanks,
Quentin
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com>
To: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
Cc: will@kernel.org, james.morse@arm.com, alexandru.elisei@arm.com,
	catalin.marinas@arm.com, suzuki.poulose@arm.com,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, kernel-team@android.com,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/7] KVM: arm64: Unify MMIO and mem host stage-2 pools
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2021 08:04:52 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YL3TJDlMNCyq7JK3@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <b4e4647166447d8fd22b360369de4acb@kernel.org>

On Sunday 06 Jun 2021 at 11:31:20 (+0100), Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On 2021-06-02 10:43, Quentin Perret wrote:
> > We currently maintain two separate memory pools for the host stage-2,
> > one for pages used in the page-table when mapping memory regions, and
> > the other to map MMIO regions. The former is large enough to map all of
> > memory with page granularity and the latter can cover an arbitrary
> > portion of IPA space, but allows to 'recycle' pages.
> > 
> > However, this split makes accounting difficult to manage as pages at
> > intermediate levels of the page-table may be used to map both memory and
> > MMIO regions. Simplify the scheme by merging both pools into one. This
> > means we can now hit the -ENOMEM case in the memory abort path, but
> > we're still guaranteed forward-progress in the worst case by unmapping
> > MMIO regions. On the plus side this also means we can usually map a lot
> > more MMIO space at once if memory ranges happen to be mapped with block
> > mappings.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com>
> 
> This patch fails to apply on top of -rc4. Did you use some more exotic
> base or, as I suspect, a development tree?
> 
> Please check and respin the series if necessary.

I used kvmarm/next, but clearly an out-of-date one. I'll respin -- sorry
about that.

Thanks,
Quentin

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com>
To: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
Cc: will@kernel.org, james.morse@arm.com, alexandru.elisei@arm.com,
	catalin.marinas@arm.com, suzuki.poulose@arm.com,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, kernel-team@android.com,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/7] KVM: arm64: Unify MMIO and mem host stage-2 pools
Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2021 08:04:52 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YL3TJDlMNCyq7JK3@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <b4e4647166447d8fd22b360369de4acb@kernel.org>

On Sunday 06 Jun 2021 at 11:31:20 (+0100), Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On 2021-06-02 10:43, Quentin Perret wrote:
> > We currently maintain two separate memory pools for the host stage-2,
> > one for pages used in the page-table when mapping memory regions, and
> > the other to map MMIO regions. The former is large enough to map all of
> > memory with page granularity and the latter can cover an arbitrary
> > portion of IPA space, but allows to 'recycle' pages.
> > 
> > However, this split makes accounting difficult to manage as pages at
> > intermediate levels of the page-table may be used to map both memory and
> > MMIO regions. Simplify the scheme by merging both pools into one. This
> > means we can now hit the -ENOMEM case in the memory abort path, but
> > we're still guaranteed forward-progress in the worst case by unmapping
> > MMIO regions. On the plus side this also means we can usually map a lot
> > more MMIO space at once if memory ranges happen to be mapped with block
> > mappings.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com>
> 
> This patch fails to apply on top of -rc4. Did you use some more exotic
> base or, as I suspect, a development tree?
> 
> Please check and respin the series if necessary.

I used kvmarm/next, but clearly an out-of-date one. I'll respin -- sorry
about that.

Thanks,
Quentin

  reply	other threads:[~2021-06-07  8:05 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-06-02  9:43 [PATCH v2 0/7] KVM: arm64: Reduce hyp_vmemmap overhead Quentin Perret
2021-06-02  9:43 ` Quentin Perret
2021-06-02  9:43 ` Quentin Perret
2021-06-02  9:43 ` [PATCH v2 1/7] KVM: arm64: Move hyp_pool locking out of refcount helpers Quentin Perret
2021-06-02  9:43   ` Quentin Perret
2021-06-02  9:43   ` Quentin Perret
2021-06-02  9:43 ` [PATCH v2 2/7] KVM: arm64: Use refcount at hyp to check page availability Quentin Perret
2021-06-02  9:43   ` Quentin Perret
2021-06-02  9:43   ` Quentin Perret
2021-06-02  9:43 ` [PATCH v2 3/7] KVM: arm64: Remove list_head from hyp_page Quentin Perret
2021-06-02  9:43   ` Quentin Perret
2021-06-02  9:43   ` Quentin Perret
2021-06-02  9:43 ` [PATCH v2 4/7] KVM: arm64: Unify MMIO and mem host stage-2 pools Quentin Perret
2021-06-02  9:43   ` Quentin Perret
2021-06-02  9:43   ` Quentin Perret
2021-06-06 10:31   ` Marc Zyngier
2021-06-06 10:31     ` Marc Zyngier
2021-06-06 10:31     ` Marc Zyngier
2021-06-07  8:04     ` Quentin Perret [this message]
2021-06-07  8:04       ` Quentin Perret
2021-06-07  8:04       ` Quentin Perret
2021-06-02  9:43 ` [PATCH v2 5/7] KVM: arm64: Remove hyp_pool pointer from struct hyp_page Quentin Perret
2021-06-02  9:43   ` Quentin Perret
2021-06-02  9:43   ` Quentin Perret
2021-06-02  9:43 ` [PATCH v2 6/7] KVM: arm64: Use less bits for hyp_page order Quentin Perret
2021-06-02  9:43   ` Quentin Perret
2021-06-02  9:43   ` Quentin Perret
2021-06-02  9:43 ` [PATCH v2 7/7] KVM: arm64: Use less bits for hyp_page refcount Quentin Perret
2021-06-02  9:43   ` Quentin Perret
2021-06-02  9:43   ` Quentin Perret

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=YL3TJDlMNCyq7JK3@google.com \
    --to=qperret@google.com \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=kernel-team@android.com \
    --cc=kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=maz@kernel.org \
    --cc=will@kernel.org \
    /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.