From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrea Arcangeli Subject: Re: mmu_notifers, pte_dirty questions Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2010 20:36:08 +0200 Message-ID: <20100606183608.GI28052@random.random> References: <4C0B8F7F.507@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Marcelo Tosatti , KVM list To: Avi Kivity Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:48695 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751450Ab0FFSgK (ORCPT ); Sun, 6 Jun 2010 14:36:10 -0400 Received: from int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.18]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id o56Ia9QH020467 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Sun, 6 Jun 2010 14:36:10 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4C0B8F7F.507@redhat.com> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Sun, Jun 06, 2010 at 03:07:27PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote: > Why no notifer when testing and clearing the dirty bit? > > (*clear_flush_dirty)(...). > > > static int page_mkclean_one(struct page *page, struct vm_area_struct *vma, > > unsigned long address) > > { > > struct mm_struct *mm = vma->vm_mm; > > pte_t *pte; > > spinlock_t *ptl; > > int ret = 0; > > > > pte = page_check_address(page, mm, address, &ptl, 1); > > if (!pte) > > goto out; > > > > if (pte_dirty(*pte) || pte_write(*pte)) { > > pte_t entry; > > > > flush_cache_page(vma, address, pte_pfn(*pte)); > > entry = ptep_clear_flush_notify(vma, address, pte); > > entry = pte_wrprotect(entry); > > entry = pte_mkclean(entry); > > set_pte_at(mm, address, pte, entry); > > set_pte_at_notify()? without this (or clear_flush_dirty) Linux will > assume all ptes are now clean; if the guest writes to a page nothing > will catch it. > > -> with set_pte_at_notify(), we can drop the spte and mark the page as > dirty, so the next write will re-instantiate the spte > -> with ->clear_flush_dirty(), we can track the dirty state without > dropping the spte. > > > ret = 1; > > } > > > > pte_unmap_unlock(pte, ptl); > > out: > > return ret; > > I'm probably missing something big as I can't see how this works. Under the PT lock it's safe to keep the PTE zero, just the pte must be non zero again before pte_unmap_unlock. The sptes are all gone by the time ptep_clear_flush_notify returns (also gup-fast is stopped with the IPI of the flush) and no spte can be established again before pte_unmap_unlock runs, so it's all safe as far as I can tell. set_pte_at_notify might prevent a minor fault though.