From: Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@linux.dev>
To: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Cc: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>, James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@arm.com>,
Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
kvmarm@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] KVM: arm64: Use a separate function for hyp stage-1 walks
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2022 17:23:51 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y3PLJxnvmZp35MpF@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20221115132532.GA524@willie-the-truck>
Hey Will,
On Tue, Nov 15, 2022 at 01:25:34PM +0000, Will Deacon wrote:
[...]
> On Mon, Nov 14, 2022 at 08:11:27PM +0000, Oliver Upton wrote:
> > +int kvm_pgtable_hyp_walk(struct kvm_pgtable *pgt, u64 addr, u64 size,
> > + struct kvm_pgtable_walker *walker);
>
> Hmm, this feels like slightly the wrong abstraction to me -- there's nothing
> hyp-specific about the problem being solved, it's just that the only user
> is for hyp walks.
>
> Could we instead rework 'struct kvm_pgtable' slightly so that the existing
> 'flags' field is no-longer stage-2 specific and includes a KVM_PGTABLE_LOCKED
> flag which could be set by kvm_pgtable_hyp_init()?
>
> That way the top-level API remains unchanged and the existing callers will
> continue to work.
Thanks for the suggestion! Yeah, this should be described by the flags
instead.
We already have KVM_PGTABLE_WALK_SHARED, I could actually condition the
RCU lock/unlock on that one. That would make it an explicit opt-in
instead of requiring an opt out with callers passing KVM_PGTABLE_LOCKED.
Thoughts?
--
Thanks,
Oliver
prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-11-15 17:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-11-14 20:11 [PATCH 0/1] KVM: arm64: Skip RCU protection for hyp stage-1 Oliver Upton
2022-11-14 20:11 ` [PATCH 1/1] KVM: arm64: Use a separate function for hyp stage-1 walks Oliver Upton
2022-11-15 13:25 ` Will Deacon
2022-11-15 17:23 ` Oliver Upton [this message]
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=Y3PLJxnvmZp35MpF@google.com \
--to=oliver.upton@linux.dev \
--cc=alexandru.elisei@arm.com \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=james.morse@arm.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=suzuki.poulose@arm.com \
--cc=will@kernel.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox