From: Yu Zhang <yu.c.zhang@linux.intel.com>
To: seanjc@google.com, pbonzini@redhat.com
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
vkuznets@redhat.com, wanpengli@tencent.com, jmattson@google.com,
joro@8bytes.org
Subject: [PATCH v2] KVM: x86/MMU: Do not check unsync status for root SP.
Date: Sun, 7 Feb 2021 20:22:54 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210207122254.23056-1-yu.c.zhang@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In shadow page table, only leaf SPs may be marked as unsync.
And for non-leaf SPs, we use unsync_children to keep the number
of the unsynced children. In kvm_mmu_sync_root(), sp->unsync
shall always be zero for the root SP, , hence no need to check
it. Instead, a warning inside mmu_sync_children() is added, in
case someone incorrectly used it.
Also, clarify the mmu_need_write_protect(), by moving the warning
into kvm_unsync_page().
Signed-off-by: Yu Zhang <yu.c.zhang@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
---
Changes in V2:
- warnings added based on Sean's suggestion.
arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c | 12 +++++++++---
1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c
index 86af582..c4797a00cc 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c
@@ -1995,6 +1995,12 @@ static void mmu_sync_children(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
LIST_HEAD(invalid_list);
bool flush = false;
+ /*
+ * Only 4k SPTEs can directly be made unsync, the parent pages
+ * should never be unsyc'd.
+ */
+ WARN_ON_ONCE(sp->unsync);
+
while (mmu_unsync_walk(parent, &pages)) {
bool protected = false;
@@ -2502,6 +2508,8 @@ int kvm_mmu_unprotect_page(struct kvm *kvm, gfn_t gfn)
static void kvm_unsync_page(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm_mmu_page *sp)
{
+ WARN_ON(sp->role.level != PG_LEVEL_4K);
+
trace_kvm_mmu_unsync_page(sp);
++vcpu->kvm->stat.mmu_unsync;
sp->unsync = 1;
@@ -2524,7 +2532,6 @@ bool mmu_need_write_protect(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, gfn_t gfn,
if (sp->unsync)
continue;
- WARN_ON(sp->role.level != PG_LEVEL_4K);
kvm_unsync_page(vcpu, sp);
}
@@ -3406,8 +3413,7 @@ void kvm_mmu_sync_roots(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
* mmu_need_write_protect() describe what could go wrong if this
* requirement isn't satisfied.
*/
- if (!smp_load_acquire(&sp->unsync) &&
- !smp_load_acquire(&sp->unsync_children))
+ if (!smp_load_acquire(&sp->unsync_children))
return;
write_lock(&vcpu->kvm->mmu_lock);
--
1.9.1
next reply other threads:[~2021-02-07 4:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-02-07 12:22 Yu Zhang [this message]
2021-02-08 11:36 ` [PATCH v2] KVM: x86/MMU: Do not check unsync status for root SP Paolo Bonzini
2021-02-08 13:49 ` Yu Zhang
2021-02-08 16:47 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-02-09 3:33 ` Yu Zhang
2021-02-09 7:46 ` Paolo Bonzini
2021-02-09 8:53 ` Yu Zhang
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=20210207122254.23056-1-yu.c.zhang@linux.intel.com \
--to=yu.c.zhang@linux.intel.com \
--cc=jmattson@google.com \
--cc=joro@8bytes.org \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=vkuznets@redhat.com \
--cc=wanpengli@tencent.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox