From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Peter Xu Date: Fri, 07 Feb 2020 21:46:23 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 17/19] KVM: Terminate memslot walks via used_slots Message-Id: <20200207214623.GF720553@xz-x1> List-Id: References: <20200121223157.15263-1-sean.j.christopherson@intel.com> <20200121223157.15263-18-sean.j.christopherson@intel.com> <20200206210944.GD700495@xz-x1> <20200207183325.GI2401@linux.intel.com> <20200207203909.GE720553@xz-x1> <20200207211016.GN2401@linux.intel.com> In-Reply-To: <20200207211016.GN2401@linux.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Sean Christopherson Cc: Paolo Bonzini , Paul Mackerras , Christian Borntraeger , Janosch Frank , David Hildenbrand , Cornelia Huck , Vitaly Kuznetsov , Wanpeng Li , Jim Mattson , Joerg Roedel , Marc Zyngier , James Morse , Julien Thierry , Suzuki K Poulose , linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Christoffer Dall , Philippe =?utf-8?Q?Mathieu-Daud=C3=A9?= On Fri, Feb 07, 2020 at 01:10:16PM -0800, Sean Christopherson wrote: > On Fri, Feb 07, 2020 at 03:39:09PM -0500, Peter Xu wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 07, 2020 at 10:33:25AM -0800, Sean Christopherson wrote: > > > On Thu, Feb 06, 2020 at 04:09:44PM -0500, Peter Xu wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 02:31:55PM -0800, Sean Christopherson wrote: > > > > > @@ -9652,13 +9652,13 @@ int __x86_set_memory_region(struct kvm *kvm, int id, gpa_t gpa, u32 size) > > > > > if (IS_ERR((void *)hva)) > > > > > return PTR_ERR((void *)hva); > > > > > } else { > > > > > - if (!slot->npages) > > > > > + if (!slot || !slot->npages) > > > > > return 0; > > > > > > > > > > - hva = 0; > > > > > + hva = slot->userspace_addr; > > > > > > > > Is this intended? > > > > > > Yes. It's possible to allow VA=0 for userspace mappings. It's extremely > > > uncommon, but possible. Therefore "hva = 0" shouldn't be used to > > > indicate an invalid slot. > > > > Note that this is the deletion path in __x86_set_memory_region() not > > allocation. IIUC userspace_addr won't even be used in follow up code > > path so it shouldn't really matter. Or am I misunderstood somewhere? > > No, but that's precisely why I don't want to zero out @hva, as doing so > implies that '0' indicates an invalid hva, which is wrong. > > What if I change this to > > hva = 0xdeadull << 48; > > and add a blurb in the changelog about stuff hva with a non-canonical value > to indicate it's being destroyed. IMO it's fairly common to have the case where "when A is XXX then parameters B is invalid" happens in C. OK feel free to keep any of these as you prefer (how many times I spoke this only for today? :) as long as the maintainers are fine with it. And for sure an extra comment would always be nice. Thanks, -- Peter Xu