From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from out-189.mta0.migadu.com (out-189.mta0.migadu.com [91.218.175.189]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6168019EEBF for ; Mon, 24 Jun 2024 19:22:29 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=91.218.175.189 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1719256951; cv=none; b=b/P/9X5obb+NssjF74J+OP87H2BsJMg7bB9d3WXE54CEeUiyOd6QWYf3YEppHsfe5Q7zkYLjQ32qAGXv2qxzmPVJ0zgsnzlHtiBMAmVh4pUxjI8mlUH3oXzrJSwDimQPRbPWyf8cDALZwFseqrsSpZFsTE5PFWOvAsVlE+r8KWk= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1719256951; c=relaxed/simple; bh=5x4r/zXOVwVJe4QtQtfVyBQGuOPauWKN0AubbyhcIC4=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=fFGmvY7OQ1rVFZ+VfMJ23m5HHpnCckr1ERImIRObtVpdFWZ6nZf22meDksFrWGrXYoVFSjWWZ/2pbpObt1ICrBA28aWAdvflIAglGNyWfmY1fRAM6r9emrSHss+/Ri4VX/eoyByTBCIeMteziMMvSWMgC4HH1xpKjIMXfn7QrI0= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.dev; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.b=QXkgqDbh; arc=none smtp.client-ip=91.218.175.189 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.b="QXkgqDbh" X-Envelope-To: shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.com DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.dev; s=key1; t=1719256947; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=Iz/SvvFKosNQtePNUPQ7Yw5Xgp3helNlx/07uL+eC2A=; b=QXkgqDbhnEo+AB6ddh5OBYnCQiizcNcAwTOFbkQjzNYBfjK4dn9dti9Uh/J+Jb/Kf/GFD6 MpS+MNzFxueY4OFnnK3dIV5f9agAexO4JwsqHZjo8CYflZ+lel6z/ZC9oWUvEmMfpQUtWz S5XE9LUNEAhnNtmlbH0zNcbv7BbIOHk= X-Envelope-To: kvmarm@lists.linux.dev X-Envelope-To: iommu@lists.linux.dev X-Envelope-To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Envelope-To: linuxarm@huawei.com X-Envelope-To: kevin.tian@intel.com X-Envelope-To: jgg@ziepe.ca X-Envelope-To: alex.williamson@redhat.com X-Envelope-To: maz@kernel.org X-Envelope-To: will@kernel.org X-Envelope-To: robin.murphy@arm.com X-Envelope-To: jean-philippe@linaro.org X-Envelope-To: jonathan.cameron@huawei.com Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2024 12:22:20 -0700 X-Report-Abuse: Please report any abuse attempt to abuse@migadu.com and include these headers. From: Oliver Upton To: Shameer Kolothum Cc: kvmarm@lists.linux.dev, iommu@lists.linux.dev, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linuxarm@huawei.com, kevin.tian@intel.com, jgg@ziepe.ca, alex.williamson@redhat.com, maz@kernel.org, will@kernel.org, robin.murphy@arm.com, jean-philippe@linaro.org, jonathan.cameron@huawei.com Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 2/7] KVM: arm64: Introduce support to pin VMIDs Message-ID: References: <20240208151837.35068-1-shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.com> <20240208151837.35068-3-shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: kvmarm@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20240208151837.35068-3-shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.com> X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_OUT Hi Shameer, On Thu, Feb 08, 2024 at 03:18:32PM +0000, Shameer Kolothum wrote: [...] > +unsigned long kvm_arm_pinned_vmid_get(struct kvm_vmid *kvm_vmid) > +{ > + unsigned long flags; > + u64 vmid; > + > + if (!pinned_vmid_map) > + return 0; Like I'd mentioned over in the other thread, returning 0 for error conditions is rather confusing unless one is staring at the VMID allocator code. Can you rework this to return an actual error (e.g. -EINVAL) on failure? > + raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&cpu_vmid_lock, flags); > + > + vmid = atomic64_read(&kvm_vmid->id); > + > + if (refcount_inc_not_zero(&kvm_vmid->pinned)) > + goto out_unlock; > + > + if (nr_pinned_vmids >= max_pinned_vmids) { > + vmid = 0; > + goto out_unlock; > + } You need to decrement the refcount in this error path. > + > + /* > + * If we went through one or more rollover since that VMID was > + * used, make sure it is still valid, or generate a new one. > + */ > + if (!vmid_gen_match(vmid)) > + vmid = new_vmid(kvm_vmid); > + > + nr_pinned_vmids++; > + __set_bit(vmid2idx(vmid), pinned_vmid_map); > + refcount_set(&kvm_vmid->pinned, 1); > + > +out_unlock: > + raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&cpu_vmid_lock, flags); > + > + vmid &= ~VMID_MASK; > + > + return vmid; > +} > + > +void kvm_arm_pinned_vmid_put(struct kvm_vmid *kvm_vmid) > +{ > + unsigned long flags; > + u64 vmid = atomic64_read(&kvm_vmid->id); > + > + if (!pinned_vmid_map) > + return; > + > + raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&cpu_vmid_lock, flags); > + > + if (refcount_dec_and_test(&kvm_vmid->pinned)) { > + __clear_bit(vmid2idx(vmid), pinned_vmid_map); > + nr_pinned_vmids--; > + } > + > + raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&cpu_vmid_lock, flags); > +} > + > /* > * Initialize the VMID allocator > */ > @@ -191,10 +263,20 @@ int __init kvm_arm_vmid_alloc_init(void) > if (!vmid_map) > return -ENOMEM; > > + pinned_vmid_map = bitmap_zalloc(NUM_USER_VMIDS, GFP_KERNEL); > + nr_pinned_vmids = 0; > + > + /* > + * Ensure we have at least one emty slot available after rollover typo: empty -- Thanks, Oliver