From: Leonardo Bras <leo.bras@arm.com>
To: sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev
Cc: Leonardo Bras <leo.bras@arm.com>,
Oliver Upton <oupton@kernel.org>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, kvmarm@lists.linux.dev,
Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 09/11] kvm/dirty_ring: Add arch-generic interface for hw-accelerated dirty-ring cleaning
Date: Mon, 3 Aug 2026 17:04:05 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <anC79Slpmwl0yePC@LeoBrasDK> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260729111451.EB5EE1F00A3D@smtp.kernel.org>
On Wed, Jul 29, 2026 at 11:14:51AM +0000, sashiko-bot@kernel.org wrote:
> Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 3 potential issue(s) to consider:
> - [Low] The monolithic `#ifndef CONFIG_HAVE_KVM_HW_DIRTY_BIT` guard causes a build failure for architectures that implement only one of the hardware-accelerated dirty logging hooks.
> - [Low] The undocumented API contract of `kvm_arch_dirty_ring_clear` silently shifts the responsibility of updating KVM dirty ring state to the architecture hook.
> - [Low] Missing forward declaration for `struct kvm_dirty_ring` in `include/linux/kvm_dirty_bit.h`.
> --
>
> --- Patch [9]: [PATCH v3 09/11] kvm/dirty_ring: Add arch-generic interface for hw-accelerated dirty-ring cleaning ---
> commit 54695fde1ebfc7f27e678570e500f9d9eb6ecff5
> Author: Leonardo Bras <leo.bras@arm.com>
>
> kvm/dirty_ring: Add arch-generic interface for hw-accelerated dirty-ring cleaning
>
> Introduce kvm_arch_dirty_ring_clear() to allow architecture-specific
> hardware-accelerated dirty-ring routines. The call is added to
> kvm_dirty_ring_reset() and falls back to a software version if not
> implemented or if an error is detected.
>
> > diff --git a/include/linux/kvm_dirty_bit.h b/include/linux/kvm_dirty_bit.h
> > index fa4f6b67b6235..8492979d694e7 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/kvm_dirty_bit.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/kvm_dirty_bit.h
> > @@ -18,6 +18,13 @@ static inline int kvm_arch_dirty_log_clear(struct kvm *kvm,
> > return -ENXIO;
> > }
> >
> > +static inline int kvm_arch_dirty_ring_clear(struct kvm *kvm,
> > + struct kvm_dirty_ring *ring,
>
> [Severity: Low]
> Does this struct need a forward declaration?
>
> If this header is included before include/linux/kvm_dirty_ring.h, might this
> cause a compiler warning for struct kvm_dirty_ring being declared inside a
> parameter list?
It's included in proper order
>
> > + int *nr_entries_reset)
> > +{
> > + return -ENXIO;
> > +}
> > +
> > #else /* CONFIG_HAVE_KVM_HW_DIRTY_BIT */
>
> [Severity: Low]
> Could this monolithic config guard cause a build failure if an architecture
> enables CONFIG_HAVE_KVM_HW_DIRTY_BIT to provide kvm_arch_dirty_log_clear(),
> but does not implement kvm_arch_dirty_ring_clear()?
>
It's a package, you have to provide both.
If not, provide a return -ENXIO inlined function such as above.
> Because the fallback for kvm_arch_dirty_ring_clear() is excluded when the
> config is enabled, omitting it in the arch-specific header would leave it
> undeclared.
>
> >
> > #include <asm/kvm_dirty_bit.h>
> > diff --git a/virt/kvm/dirty_ring.c b/virt/kvm/dirty_ring.c
> > index 807c45fb1fc7b..3fa62894f3d24 100644
> > --- a/virt/kvm/dirty_ring.c
> > +++ b/virt/kvm/dirty_ring.c
>
> [ ... ]
>
> > @@ -133,6 +134,9 @@ int kvm_dirty_ring_reset(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_dirty_ring *ring,
> > */
> > lockdep_assert_held(&kvm->slots_lock);
> >
> > + if (kvm_arch_dirty_ring_clear(kvm, ring, nr_entries_reset) >= 0)
> > + goto out;
> > +
>
> [Severity: Low]
> Does this bypass implicitly require the arch-specific hook to manually update
> the internal state of the dirty ring?
>
> If an architecture implements kvm_arch_dirty_ring_clear() and returns success,
> this goto skips the generic software loop. The arch hook would need to
> manually increment ring->reset_index, update *nr_entries_reset, and call
> kvm_dirty_gfn_set_invalid() for each processed entry to avoid corrupting the
> ring state. Is this API contract expected to be documented here?
Yes, since it skips everything else in the function, it's required to do
the dirty-ring management as well.
Okay, will keep in mind that this file has the comments about this and log
being NULL from before.
Leo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-08-03 16:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-29 10:45 [PATCH v3 00/11] KVM Dirty-bit cleaning hw accelerator (HACDBS) Leonardo Bras
2026-07-29 10:45 ` [PATCH v3 01/11] KVM: arm64: HDBSS bits Leonardo Bras
2026-07-29 10:55 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-03 13:13 ` Leonardo Bras
2026-07-29 10:45 ` [PATCH v3 02/11] arm64/cpufeature: Add system-wide FEAT_HACDBS detection Leonardo Bras
2026-07-29 11:02 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-03 13:50 ` Leonardo Bras
2026-07-29 10:45 ` [PATCH v3 03/11] arm64/sysreg: Add HACDBS consumer and base registers Leonardo Bras
2026-07-29 10:45 ` [PATCH v3 04/11] KVM: arm64: dirty_bit: Add base FEAT_HACDBS cleaning routine Leonardo Bras
2026-07-29 10:57 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-03 14:47 ` Leonardo Bras
2026-07-29 10:45 ` [PATCH v3 05/11] kvm: Add arch-generic interface for hw-accelerated dirty-bitmap cleaning Leonardo Bras
2026-07-29 11:00 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-03 15:16 ` Leonardo Bras
2026-07-29 10:45 ` [PATCH v3 06/11] KVM: arm64: Add hardware-accelerated dirty-bitmap cleaning routine Leonardo Bras
2026-07-29 11:18 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-03 15:35 ` Leonardo Bras
2026-07-29 10:45 ` [PATCH v3 07/11] KVM: arm64: Dirty-bitmap: avoid splitting previously split blocks Leonardo Bras
2026-07-29 11:08 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-03 15:54 ` Leonardo Bras
2026-07-29 10:45 ` [PATCH v3 08/11] kvm/dirty_ring: Introduce get_memslot and move helpers to header Leonardo Bras
2026-07-29 10:45 ` [PATCH v3 09/11] kvm/dirty_ring: Add arch-generic interface for hw-accelerated dirty-ring cleaning Leonardo Bras
2026-07-29 11:14 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-03 16:04 ` Leonardo Bras [this message]
2026-07-29 10:45 ` [PATCH v3 10/11] KVM: arm64: Add hardware-accelerated dirty-ring cleaning routine Leonardo Bras
2026-07-29 11:21 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-03 16:07 ` Leonardo Bras
2026-07-29 10:45 ` [PATCH v3 11/11] KVM: arm64: Enable KVM_HW_DIRTY_BIT Leonardo Bras
2026-07-29 11:29 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-03 16:38 ` Leonardo Bras
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=anC79Slpmwl0yePC@LeoBrasDK \
--to=leo.bras@arm.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kvmarm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=oupton@kernel.org \
--cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
/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