From: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
To: Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, kvm@vger.kernel.org
Cc: schwidefsky@de.ibm.com, borntraeger@de.ibm.com,
dominik.dingel@gmail.com, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH v2 01/22] s390/mm: make gmap_protect_range more modular
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2018 12:33:00 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <f8fe917b-a95f-406c-fa6b-b12b2dae6e61@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1513169613-13509-2-git-send-email-frankja@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
On 13.12.2017 13:53, Janosch Frank wrote:
> This patch reworks the gmap_protect_range logic and extracts the pte
> handling into an own function. Also we do now walk to the pmd and make
> it accessible in the function for later use. This way we can add huge
> page handling logic more easily.
>
> Signed-off-by: Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Reviewed-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
> Reviewed-by: Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>
> ---
> arch/s390/mm/gmap.c | 102 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
> 1 file changed, 92 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/s390/mm/gmap.c b/arch/s390/mm/gmap.c
> index 05d459b..8de8bf9 100644
> --- a/arch/s390/mm/gmap.c
> +++ b/arch/s390/mm/gmap.c
> @@ -874,7 +874,88 @@ static int gmap_pte_op_fixup(struct gmap *gmap, unsigned long gaddr,
> */
> static void gmap_pte_op_end(spinlock_t *ptl)
> {
> - spin_unlock(ptl);
> + if (ptl)
> + spin_unlock(ptl);
> +}
> +
> +/**
> + * gmap_pmd_op_walk - walk the gmap tables, get the guest table lock
> + * and return the pmd pointer
> + * @gmap: pointer to guest mapping meta data structure
> + * @gaddr: virtual address in the guest address space
> + *
> + * Returns a pointer to the pmd for a guest address, or NULL
> + */
> +static inline pmd_t *gmap_pmd_op_walk(struct gmap *gmap, unsigned long gaddr)
> +{
> + pmd_t *pmdp;
> +
> + spin_lock(&gmap->guest_table_lock);
> + pmdp = (pmd_t *) gmap_table_walk(gmap, gaddr, 1);
> +
> + /*
> + * Empty pmds can become large after we give up the
> + * guest_table_lock, so we have to check for pmd_none
> + * here.
> + */
Don't understand that comment. We give up the lock after we're done with
the pmd either way. So I think this comment can go.
> + if (!pmdp || pmd_none(*pmdp)) {
> + spin_unlock(&gmap->guest_table_lock);
> + return NULL;
> + }
> + /*
> + * For plain 4k guests that do not run under the vsie it
> + * suffices to take the pte lock later on. Thus we can unlock
> + * the guest_table_lock here.
> + */
As discussed, the gmap_is_shadow() check is not needed. The comment
should be something like
/* 4k page table entries are locked via the pte (pte_alloc_map_lock). */
> + if (!pmd_large(*pmdp) && !gmap_is_shadow(gmap))
> + spin_unlock(&gmap->guest_table_lock);
> + return pmdp;
> +}
> +
> +/**
> + * gmap_pmd_op_end - release the guest_table_lock if needed
> + * @gmap: pointer to the guest mapping meta data structure
> + * @pmdp: pointer to the pmd
> + */
> +static inline void gmap_pmd_op_end(struct gmap *gmap, pmd_t *pmdp)
> +{
> + if (pmd_large(*pmdp) || gmap_is_shadow(gmap))
As discussed, gmap_is_shadow() can go.
> + spin_unlock(&gmap->guest_table_lock);
> +}
> +
> +/*
> + * gmap_protect_pte - remove access rights to memory and set pgste bits
> + * @gmap: pointer to guest mapping meta data structure
> + * @gaddr: virtual address in the guest address space
> + * @pmdp: pointer to the pmd associated with the pte
> + * @prot: indicates access rights: PROT_NONE, PROT_READ or PROT_WRITE
> + * @bits: pgste notification bits to set
> + *
> + * Returns 0 if successfully protected, -ENOMEM if out of memory and
> + * -EAGAIN if a fixup is needed.
> + *
> + * Expected to be called with sg->mm->mmap_sem in read and
> + * guest_table_lock held for shadow gmaps.
> + */
> +static int gmap_protect_pte(struct gmap *gmap, unsigned long gaddr,
> + pmd_t *pmdp, int prot, unsigned long bits)
> +{
> + int rc;
> + pte_t *ptep;
> + spinlock_t *ptl = NULL;
> +
> + /* We have no upper segment, let's go back and fix this up. */
> + if (pmd_val(*pmdp) & _SEGMENT_ENTRY_INVALID)
> + return -EAGAIN;
This is essentially pmd_none(*pmdp), which you already verified in
gmap_pmd_op_walk().
I suggest requiring for this function that the entry is valid (which is
always the case) and getting rid of the -EAGAIN return code. Makes this
function simpler.
> +
> + ptep = pte_alloc_map_lock(gmap->mm, pmdp, gaddr, &ptl);
> + if (!ptep)
> + return -ENOMEM;
> +
> + /* Protect and unlock. */
> + rc = ptep_force_prot(gmap->mm, gaddr, ptep, prot, bits);
> + gmap_pte_op_end(ptl);
> + return rc;
> }
>
> /*
> @@ -896,16 +977,20 @@ static int gmap_protect_range(struct gmap *gmap, unsigned long gaddr,
> unsigned long len, int prot, unsigned long bits)
> {
> unsigned long vmaddr;
> - spinlock_t *ptl;
> - pte_t *ptep;
> + pmd_t *pmdp;
> int rc;
>
> while (len) {
> rc = -EAGAIN;
> - ptep = gmap_pte_op_walk(gmap, gaddr, &ptl);
> - if (ptep) {
> - rc = ptep_force_prot(gmap->mm, gaddr, ptep, prot, bits);
> - gmap_pte_op_end(ptl);
> + pmdp = gmap_pmd_op_walk(gmap, gaddr);
> + if (pmdp) {
> + rc = gmap_protect_pte(gmap, gaddr, pmdp, prot,
> + bits);
> + if (!rc) {
> + len -= PAGE_SIZE;
> + gaddr += PAGE_SIZE;
> + }
> + gmap_pmd_op_end(gmap, pmdp);
This change looks good to me.
> }
> if (rc) {
> vmaddr = __gmap_translate(gmap, gaddr);
> @@ -914,10 +999,7 @@ static int gmap_protect_range(struct gmap *gmap, unsigned long gaddr,
> rc = gmap_pte_op_fixup(gmap, gaddr, vmaddr, prot);
> if (rc)
> return rc;
> - continue;
> }
> - gaddr += PAGE_SIZE;
> - len -= PAGE_SIZE;
> }
> return 0;
> }
>
--
Thanks,
David / dhildenb
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-01-22 11:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 67+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-12-13 12:53 [RFC/PATCH v2 00/22] KVM/s390: Hugetlbfs enablement Janosch Frank
2017-12-13 12:53 ` [RFC/PATCH v2 01/22] s390/mm: make gmap_protect_range more modular Janosch Frank
2018-01-22 11:33 ` David Hildenbrand [this message]
2018-01-22 12:31 ` Janosch Frank
2018-01-22 12:50 ` David Hildenbrand
2018-01-22 13:02 ` Janosch Frank
2017-12-13 12:53 ` [RFC/PATCH v2 02/22] s390/mm: Abstract gmap notify bit setting Janosch Frank
2018-01-22 11:34 ` David Hildenbrand
2017-12-13 12:53 ` [RFC/PATCH v2 03/22] s390/mm: add gmap PMD invalidation notification Janosch Frank
2017-12-21 9:24 ` Janosch Frank
2018-01-22 11:46 ` David Hildenbrand
2018-01-22 13:13 ` Janosch Frank
2018-01-22 13:29 ` David Hildenbrand
2018-01-22 14:04 ` Janosch Frank
2018-01-22 11:56 ` David Hildenbrand
2018-01-22 12:09 ` Janosch Frank
2018-01-22 12:12 ` David Hildenbrand
2017-12-13 12:53 ` [RFC/PATCH v2 04/22] s390/mm: Add gmap pmd invalidation and clearing Janosch Frank
2017-12-13 12:53 ` [RFC/PATCH v2 05/22] s390/mm: hugetlb pages within a gmap can not be freed Janosch Frank
2018-01-24 13:45 ` David Hildenbrand
2018-01-24 13:56 ` Janosch Frank
2017-12-13 12:53 ` [RFC/PATCH v2 06/22] s390/mm: Introduce gmap_pmdp_xchg Janosch Frank
2017-12-13 12:53 ` [RFC/PATCH v2 07/22] RFC: s390/mm: Transfer guest pmd protection to host Janosch Frank
2017-12-13 12:53 ` [RFC/PATCH v2 08/22] s390/mm: Add huge page dirty sync support Janosch Frank
2017-12-13 12:53 ` [RFC/PATCH v2 09/22] s390/mm: clear huge page storage keys on enable_skey Janosch Frank
2017-12-13 12:53 ` [RFC/PATCH v2 10/22] s390/mm: Add huge pmd storage key handling Janosch Frank
2017-12-13 12:53 ` [RFC/PATCH v2 11/22] s390/mm: Remove superfluous parameter Janosch Frank
2017-12-21 9:22 ` Janosch Frank
2018-01-16 12:39 ` Janosch Frank
2018-01-16 13:11 ` David Hildenbrand
2018-01-22 13:14 ` Christian Borntraeger
2018-01-22 13:24 ` Martin Schwidefsky
2017-12-13 12:53 ` [RFC/PATCH v2 12/22] s390/mm: Add gmap_protect_large read protection support Janosch Frank
2017-12-13 12:53 ` [RFC/PATCH v2 13/22] s390/mm: Make gmap_read_table EDAT1 compatible Janosch Frank
2017-12-13 12:53 ` [RFC/PATCH v2 14/22] s390/mm: Make protect_rmap " Janosch Frank
2017-12-13 12:53 ` [RFC/PATCH v2 15/22] s390/mm: GMAP read table extensions Janosch Frank
2017-12-13 12:53 ` [RFC/PATCH v2 16/22] s390/mm: Add shadow segment code Janosch Frank
2017-12-13 12:53 ` [RFC/PATCH v2 17/22] s390/mm: Add VSIE reverse fake case Janosch Frank
2017-12-13 12:53 ` [RFC/PATCH v2 18/22] s390/mm: Remove gmap_pte_op_walk Janosch Frank
2017-12-13 12:53 ` [RFC/PATCH v2 19/22] s390/mm: Split huge pages if granular protection is needed Janosch Frank
2018-01-25 7:16 ` Janosch Frank
2018-01-25 14:39 ` David Hildenbrand
2018-01-25 14:55 ` Janosch Frank
2017-12-13 12:53 ` [RFC/PATCH v2 20/22] s390/mm: Enable gmap huge pmd support Janosch Frank
2017-12-13 12:53 ` [RFC/PATCH v2 21/22] KVM: s390: Add KVM HPAGE capability Janosch Frank
2017-12-20 13:02 ` Cornelia Huck
2017-12-20 13:17 ` Janosch Frank
2017-12-20 13:21 ` Cornelia Huck
2017-12-13 12:53 ` [RFC/PATCH v2 22/22] RFC: s390/mm: Add gmap lock classes Janosch Frank
2017-12-20 12:24 ` Christian Borntraeger
2017-12-20 12:36 ` Janosch Frank
2017-12-20 12:23 ` [RFC/PATCH v2 00/22] KVM/s390: Hugetlbfs enablement Christian Borntraeger
2017-12-21 12:00 ` David Hildenbrand
2017-12-22 9:08 ` Christian Borntraeger
2018-01-02 0:02 ` Janosch Frank
2018-01-22 11:23 ` David Hildenbrand
2018-01-22 11:56 ` Christian Borntraeger
2018-01-23 21:15 ` David Hildenbrand
2018-01-24 9:01 ` Janosch Frank
2018-01-24 9:14 ` David Hildenbrand
2018-01-25 15:33 ` [PATCH 0/2] Huge page pte protection Janosch Frank
2018-01-25 15:33 ` [PATCH 1/2] mm: s390: Only notify on 4k pages Janosch Frank
2018-01-25 16:04 ` David Hildenbrand
2018-01-26 10:31 ` Janosch Frank
2018-01-25 15:33 ` [PATCH 2/2] mm: s390: Rename gmap_pte_op_fixup Janosch Frank
2018-01-26 10:34 ` [PATCH v2] mm: s390: Only notify on 4k pages Janosch Frank
2018-01-30 10:19 ` David Hildenbrand
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=f8fe917b-a95f-406c-fa6b-b12b2dae6e61@redhat.com \
--to=david@redhat.com \
--cc=borntraeger@de.ibm.com \
--cc=dominik.dingel@gmail.com \
--cc=frankja@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=schwidefsky@de.ibm.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).