From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Xiao Guangrong Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 03/16] KVM: MMU: properly assert spte on rmap walking path Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2012 11:26:19 +0800 Message-ID: <4F8B915B.9080407@linux.vnet.ibm.com> References: <4F87FA69.5060106@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <4F87FBA5.3060203@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20120414111544.b3a4b9273fe84ddc33cb7e1c@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Avi Kivity , Marcelo Tosatti , LKML , KVM To: Takuya Yoshikawa Return-path: Received: from e28smtp03.in.ibm.com ([122.248.162.3]:43102 "EHLO e28smtp03.in.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751197Ab2DPD0b (ORCPT ); Sun, 15 Apr 2012 23:26:31 -0400 Received: from /spool/local by e28smtp03.in.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Mon, 16 Apr 2012 08:56:26 +0530 In-Reply-To: <20120414111544.b3a4b9273fe84ddc33cb7e1c@gmail.com> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 04/14/2012 10:15 AM, Takuya Yoshikawa wrote: > On Fri, 13 Apr 2012 18:10:45 +0800 > Xiao Guangrong wrote: > >> static u64 *rmap_get_next(struct rmap_iterator *iter) >> { >> + u64 *sptep = NULL; >> + >> if (iter->desc) { >> if (iter->pos < PTE_LIST_EXT - 1) { >> - u64 *sptep; >> - >> ++iter->pos; >> sptep = iter->desc->sptes[iter->pos]; >> if (sptep) >> - return sptep; >> + goto exit; >> } >> >> iter->desc = iter->desc->more; >> @@ -1028,11 +1036,14 @@ static u64 *rmap_get_next(struct rmap_iterator *iter) >> if (iter->desc) { >> iter->pos = 0; >> /* desc->sptes[0] cannot be NULL */ >> - return iter->desc->sptes[iter->pos]; >> + sptep = iter->desc->sptes[iter->pos]; >> + goto exit; >> } >> } >> >> - return NULL; >> +exit: >> + WARN_ON(sptep && !is_shadow_present_pte(*sptep)); >> + return sptep; >> } > > This will, probably, again force rmap_get_next function-call even with EPT/NPT: > CPU cannot skip it by branch prediction. > No, EPT/NPT also needs it.