kvm.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
To: Maxim Levitsky <mlevitsk@redhat.com>
Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] KVM: x86/mmu: remove unnecessary "bool shared" argument from iterators
Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2023 09:14:14 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZRb31g0PBR588XwK@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6bc63f82495501f9664b7d19bd8c7ba64329d37b.camel@redhat.com>

On Thu, Sep 28, 2023, Maxim Levitsky wrote:
> У чт, 2023-09-28 у 12:29 -0400, Paolo Bonzini пише:
> > The "bool shared" argument is more or less unnecessary in the
> > for_each_*_tdp_mmu_root_yield_safe() macros.  Many users check for
> > the lock before calling it; all of them either call small functions
> > that do the check, or end up calling tdp_mmu_set_spte_atomic() and
> > tdp_mmu_iter_set_spte().  Add a few assertions to make up for the
> > lost check in for_each_*_tdp_mmu_root_yield_safe(), but even this
> > is probably overkill and mostly for documentation reasons.
> 
> Why not to leave the 'kvm_lockdep_assert_mmu_lock_held' but drop the shared
> argument from it?  and then use lockdep_assert_held. If I am not mistaken,
> lockdep_assert_held should assert if the lock is held for read or write.

+1, I don't see any downside to asserting that mmu_lock is held when iterating.

It'll be a redundant assertion 99% of the time, but it's not like performance
matters all that much when running with lockdep enabled.  And I find lockdep
assertions to be wonderful documentation.

  reply	other threads:[~2023-09-29 16:14 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-09-28 16:29 [PATCH 0/3] KVM: x86/mmu: small locking cleanups Paolo Bonzini
2023-09-28 16:29 ` [PATCH 1/3] KVM: x86/mmu: remove unnecessary "bool shared" argument from functions Paolo Bonzini
2023-09-28 16:46   ` Maxim Levitsky
2023-09-29 16:11   ` Sean Christopherson
2023-09-28 16:29 ` [PATCH 2/3] KVM: x86/mmu: remove unnecessary "bool shared" argument from iterators Paolo Bonzini
2023-09-28 16:55   ` Maxim Levitsky
2023-09-29 16:14     ` Sean Christopherson [this message]
2023-09-28 16:29 ` [PATCH 3/3] KVM: x86/mmu: always take tdp_mmu_pages_lock Paolo Bonzini
2023-09-29  7:30   ` kernel test robot
2023-09-29 16:16     ` Sean Christopherson

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=ZRb31g0PBR588XwK@google.com \
    --to=seanjc@google.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mlevitsk@redhat.com \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).