public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>
To: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@novell.com>
Cc: Chris Lalancette <clalance@redhat.com>,
	"xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH]: Fix Xen domU boot with batched	 mprotect
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2008 09:23:53 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <48F61919.2050005@goop.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <48F6274D.76E4.0078.0@novell.com>

Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> Chris Lalancette <clalance@redhat.com> 15.10.08 13:03 >>>
>>>>         
>> The right thing to do is to use arbitrary_virt_to_machine, so that we can be
>> sure we are modifying the right pfn.  This unfortunately introduces a
>> performance penalty because of a full page-table-walk, but we can avoid that
>> penalty for pages in the p2m list by checking if virt_addr_valid is true, and if
>> so, just doing the lookup in the p2m table.
>>     
>
> Could you explain how virt_addr_valid() can validly be used here? Looking
> at its implementation
>
> #define virt_addr_valid(kaddr)	pfn_valid(__pa(kaddr) >> PAGE_SHIFT)
>
> a kaddr in kmap space (i.e. above high_memory) would return a bogus
> physical address, and hence pfn_valid() on the resulting pfn is meaningless.
>   

virt_addr_valid() is supposed to be usable in this circumstace.  The 
comment says "virt_to_page(kaddr) returns a valid pointer if and only if 
virt_addr_valid(kaddr) returns true", which implies that 
virt_addr_valid() returns a meaningful result on all addresses - and if 
not, it should be fixed.

> I'd instead simply compare the address in question against high_memory,
> and perhaps instead of in arbitrary_virt_to_machine() in
> ptep_modify_prot_commit() under an #ifdef CONFIG_HIGHPTE.

I suppose, but I don't think there's much cost in making it generally 
robust.

>  But
> performance-wise, CONFIG_HIGHPTE sucks under Xen anyway, so you'd
> better not turn this on in the first place. We may want/need to provide
> a means to disable this at run time so the same kernel when run natively
> could still make use of it, but without impacting performance under Xen.
>   

That's a secondary issue.  What's the source of the performance hit?  
Just all the extra kmap_atomic operations?

    J

  reply	other threads:[~2008-10-15 16:24 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-10-15 11:03 [PATCH]: Fix Xen domU boot with batched mprotect Chris Lalancette
2008-10-15 15:24 ` [Xen-devel] " Jan Beulich
2008-10-15 16:23   ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge [this message]
2008-10-16  7:28     ` Jan Beulich
2008-10-16  9:58     ` Jan Beulich
2008-10-16 16:10       ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-10-17  7:12         ` Jan Beulich
2008-10-17 15:19           ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-10-17 15:30             ` Jan Beulich
2008-10-17 15:36               ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge

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=48F61919.2050005@goop.org \
    --to=jeremy@goop.org \
    --cc=clalance@redhat.com \
    --cc=jbeulich@novell.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=xen-devel@lists.xensource.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