From: Andrew Cooper <Andrew.Cooper3@citrix.com>
To: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>,
"xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org" <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>
Cc: Wei Liu <wl@xen.org>, Roger Pau Monne <roger.pau@citrix.com>,
"Tim (Xen.org)" <tim@xen.org>,
George Dunlap <George.Dunlap@citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/11] x86/shadow: replace sh_reset_l3_up_pointers()
Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2023 00:55:09 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <e8bdffdf-d5ea-4320-3e84-b6654ac83002@citrix.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <03ae5a1a-4417-0aa0-27d8-833ade20cc0b@suse.com>
On 05/01/2023 3:59 pm, Jan Beulich wrote:
> Rather than doing a separate hash walk (and then even using the vCPU
> variant, which is to go away), do the up-pointer-clearing right in
> sh_unpin(), as an alternative to the (now further limited) enlisting on
> a "free floating" list fragment. This utilizes the fact that such list
> fragments are traversed only for multi-page shadows (in shadow_free()).
> Furthermore sh_terminate_list() is a safe guard only anyway, which isn't
> in use in the common case (it actually does anything only for BIGMEM
> configurations).
>
> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
Acked-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
I think. The reasoning seems plausible, but it would probably benefit
from someone else double checking.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-01-06 0:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-01-05 15:57 [PATCH 00/11] x86/shadow: misc tidying Jan Beulich
2023-01-05 15:59 ` [PATCH 01/11] x86/shadow: replace sh_reset_l3_up_pointers() Jan Beulich
2023-01-06 0:55 ` Andrew Cooper [this message]
2023-01-09 8:35 ` Jan Beulich
2023-01-05 15:59 ` [PATCH 02/11] x86/shadow: convert sh_audit_flags()'es 1st parameter to domain Jan Beulich
2023-01-05 15:59 ` [PATCH 03/11] x86/shadow: drop hash_vcpu_foreach() Jan Beulich
2023-01-05 16:00 ` [PATCH 04/11] x86/shadow: rename hash_domain_foreach() Jan Beulich
2023-01-05 16:04 ` [PATCH 05/11] x86/shadow: move bogus HVM checks in sh_pagetable_dying() Jan Beulich
2023-01-06 1:00 ` Andrew Cooper
2023-01-09 8:39 ` Jan Beulich
2023-01-05 16:04 ` [PATCH 06/11] x86/shadow: drop a few uses of mfn_valid() Jan Beulich
2023-01-06 1:02 ` Andrew Cooper
2023-01-09 8:42 ` Jan Beulich
2023-01-05 16:05 ` [PATCH 07/11] x86/shadow: L2H shadow type is PV32-only Jan Beulich
2023-01-06 1:31 ` Andrew Cooper
2023-01-09 9:12 ` Jan Beulich
2023-01-05 16:05 ` [PATCH 08/11] x86/shadow: reduce effort of hash calculation Jan Beulich
2023-01-06 2:03 ` Andrew Cooper
2023-01-09 9:48 ` Jan Beulich
2023-01-05 16:06 ` [PATCH 09/11] x86/shadow: simplify conditionals in sh_{get,put}_ref() Jan Beulich
2023-01-05 16:07 ` [PATCH 10/11] x86/shadow: correct shadow type bounds checks Jan Beulich
2023-01-05 16:07 ` [PATCH 11/11] x86/shadow: sh_remove_all_mappings() is HVM-only Jan Beulich
2023-01-06 2:03 ` [PATCH 00/11] x86/shadow: misc tidying Andrew Cooper
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=e8bdffdf-d5ea-4320-3e84-b6654ac83002@citrix.com \
--to=andrew.cooper3@citrix.com \
--cc=George.Dunlap@citrix.com \
--cc=jbeulich@suse.com \
--cc=roger.pau@citrix.com \
--cc=tim@xen.org \
--cc=wl@xen.org \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xenproject.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.