From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.6 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B69EC35242 for ; Fri, 7 Feb 2020 22:24:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mm01.cs.columbia.edu (mm01.cs.columbia.edu [128.59.11.253]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C7B0720720 for ; Fri, 7 Feb 2020 22:24:50 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="IZBWHpIA" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org C7B0720720 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=kvmarm-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mm01.cs.columbia.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 089184A598; Fri, 7 Feb 2020 17:24:50 -0500 (EST) X-Virus-Scanned: at lists.cs.columbia.edu Authentication-Results: mm01.cs.columbia.edu (amavisd-new); dkim=softfail (fail, message has been altered) header.i=@redhat.com Received: from mm01.cs.columbia.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mm01.cs.columbia.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Fhe9+UqTWXvt; Fri, 7 Feb 2020 17:24:48 -0500 (EST) Received: from mm01.cs.columbia.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mm01.cs.columbia.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB6CB4A50F; Fri, 7 Feb 2020 17:24:48 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mm01.cs.columbia.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id BCEA14A50F for ; Fri, 7 Feb 2020 17:24:46 -0500 (EST) X-Virus-Scanned: at lists.cs.columbia.edu Received: from mm01.cs.columbia.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mm01.cs.columbia.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id d1FYD5QuFTl7 for ; Fri, 7 Feb 2020 17:24:45 -0500 (EST) Received: from us-smtp-1.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com [207.211.31.120]) by mm01.cs.columbia.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86B654A389 for ; Fri, 7 Feb 2020 17:24:45 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1581114285; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=8RjmlokPjnkH8oZxzrYec3fZUGAfizyuGXB6oCxb2rQ=; b=IZBWHpIAcZRy1Z7ensrxvtWOArn6t0SSsKLt7D+kio0hX62LLxvKHph7hEpR7r/zKowrvb m5ADt4WRbn+KfOqlaYoW9LdOEIRhEMuMuRrvoNWzmr19nLNtTo4wD3xcfHvRES26VSi32r 3UcrQmx+P2L3IBoqLjidLQW/9eOGxxc= Received: from mail-qk1-f200.google.com (mail-qk1-f200.google.com [209.85.222.200]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-319-0A_oMxaVNfKTsfvv6imluw-1; Fri, 07 Feb 2020 17:24:42 -0500 Received: by mail-qk1-f200.google.com with SMTP id q135so442376qke.22 for ; Fri, 07 Feb 2020 14:24:42 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=JRnjR1s6c5pJE2ossLQbJM2NZYkPQ/exCWBRJ0Gziy8=; b=lItpmeocQIr5XSnQ1svoFCU4d8+gOES4teyctCYKCUfbGCJUSFx4YXngBwZZT2NLCs BjOt4rBotFYUwZvuQN21GaVf4JH+UvwdPxlKlyssfUZi9IjYn2oooLYchhtloo9zYMKk aVuyPpiMvu6XtwKOyiExdWm7fxD9xPsnbfrtLWaxt7AfqO+8nv7IMrBRwJKyuUfra+G1 67sZSbEomRq1a4nQFoS5SG378kcvPlkyX25MiCRbCsDgZilRunMIDd3TxGWhl3v9bpmu jhUJ4x6uLsLzxfx6Fl6WM+4FLMDiPKtJZC4zBLo+0yIuYUsNaJ8Eltfu4lf16MdY9UTt g+wA== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAV1mXp60UXLimzS+GLNPbg+cYVHKiSY7eL9LRqwNomjbern3ZlV wgIrFK12CNhhf81bucvfpWeET3a5cDtw961/giuQoBH5gmGBfyMOCqpn3Ok1slRXkM2pwYDEfYe w+Bxzghay4o2jjv2zSVA1i4FO X-Received: by 2002:a37:c53:: with SMTP id 80mr1117251qkm.285.1581114282356; Fri, 07 Feb 2020 14:24:42 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxdmbvsmW8pfTDFhkNFpJOBOyIyACeKZQZlqIgbOpE5taqn1c19m2GAF/qQjzf2ieRiXzn8Xg== X-Received: by 2002:a37:c53:: with SMTP id 80mr1117228qkm.285.1581114282106; Fri, 07 Feb 2020 14:24:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from xz-x1 ([2607:9880:19c8:32::2]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id j1sm1933090qkl.86.2020.02.07.14.24.40 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 07 Feb 2020 14:24:41 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2020 17:24:38 -0500 From: Peter Xu To: Sean Christopherson Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 17/19] KVM: Terminate memslot walks via used_slots Message-ID: <20200207222438.GH720553@xz-x1> References: <20200121223157.15263-1-sean.j.christopherson@intel.com> <20200121223157.15263-18-sean.j.christopherson@intel.com> <20200206210944.GD700495@xz-x1> <20200207183325.GI2401@linux.intel.com> <20200207203909.GE720553@xz-x1> <20200207211016.GN2401@linux.intel.com> <20200207214623.GF720553@xz-x1> <20200207220325.GO2401@linux.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20200207220325.GO2401@linux.intel.com> X-MC-Unique: 0A_oMxaVNfKTsfvv6imluw-1 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Disposition: inline Cc: Wanpeng Li , kvm@vger.kernel.org, David Hildenbrand , linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, Paul Mackerras , kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu, Janosch Frank , Marc Zyngier , Joerg Roedel , Christian Borntraeger , kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Jim Mattson , Cornelia Huck , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Paolo Bonzini , Vitaly Kuznetsov , Philippe =?utf-8?Q?Mathieu-Daud=C3=A9?= X-BeenThere: kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Where KVM/ARM decisions are made List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: kvmarm-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu Sender: kvmarm-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu On Fri, Feb 07, 2020 at 02:03:25PM -0800, Sean Christopherson wrote: > On Fri, Feb 07, 2020 at 04:46:23PM -0500, Peter Xu wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 07, 2020 at 01:10:16PM -0800, Sean Christopherson wrote: > > > On Fri, Feb 07, 2020 at 03:39:09PM -0500, Peter Xu wrote: > > > > On Fri, Feb 07, 2020 at 10:33:25AM -0800, Sean Christopherson wrote: > > > > > On Thu, Feb 06, 2020 at 04:09:44PM -0500, Peter Xu wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 02:31:55PM -0800, Sean Christopherson wrote: > > > > > > > @@ -9652,13 +9652,13 @@ int __x86_set_memory_region(struct kvm *kvm, int id, gpa_t gpa, u32 size) > > > > > > > if (IS_ERR((void *)hva)) > > > > > > > return PTR_ERR((void *)hva); > > > > > > > } else { > > > > > > > - if (!slot->npages) > > > > > > > + if (!slot || !slot->npages) > > > > > > > return 0; > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - hva = 0; > > > > > > > + hva = slot->userspace_addr; > > > > > > > > > > > > Is this intended? > > > > > > > > > > Yes. It's possible to allow VA=0 for userspace mappings. It's extremely > > > > > uncommon, but possible. Therefore "hva == 0" shouldn't be used to > > > > > indicate an invalid slot. > > > > > > > > Note that this is the deletion path in __x86_set_memory_region() not > > > > allocation. IIUC userspace_addr won't even be used in follow up code > > > > path so it shouldn't really matter. Or am I misunderstood somewhere? > > > > > > No, but that's precisely why I don't want to zero out @hva, as doing so > > > implies that '0' indicates an invalid hva, which is wrong. > > > > > > What if I change this to > > > > > > hva = 0xdeadull << 48; > > > > > > and add a blurb in the changelog about stuff hva with a non-canonical value > > > to indicate it's being destroyed. > > > > IMO it's fairly common to have the case where "when A is XXX then > > parameters B is invalid" happens in C. > > I'm not arguing that's not the case. My point is that there's nothing > special about '0', so why use it? E.g. "hva = 1" would also be ok from a > functional perspective, but more obviously "wrong". I think the answer is as simple as the original author thought 0 was better than an arbitrary number on the stack, which I agree. :-) -- Peter Xu _______________________________________________ kvmarm mailing list kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm