public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Xiao Guangrong <xiaoguangrong@cn.fujitsu.com>
To: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
Cc: Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	KVM list <kvm@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 5/6] KVM: MMU: combine guest pte read between walk and pte prefetch
Date: Mon, 05 Jul 2010 16:45:47 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4C319BBB.5020408@cn.fujitsu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4C319699.9000104@redhat.com>



Avi Kivity wrote:

>> Looks into the code more carefully, maybe this code is wrong:
>>
>>
>>               if (!direct) {
>>                       r = kvm_read_guest_atomic(vcpu->kvm,
>> -                                          gw->pte_gpa[level - 2],
>> +                                          gw->pte_gpa[level - 1],
>>                                        &curr_pte, sizeof(curr_pte));
>> -                    if (r || curr_pte != gw->ptes[level - 2]) {
>> +                    if (r || curr_pte != gw->ptes[level - 1]) {
>>                                  kvm_mmu_put_page(sp, sptep);
>>                                  kvm_release_pfn_clean(pfn);
>>                                  sptep = NULL;
>>
>> It should check the 'level' mapping not 'level - 1', in the later
>> description
>> i'll explain it.
>>    
> 
> Right, this fixes the check for the top level, but it removes a check
> from the bottom level.
> 

We no need check the bottom level if guest not modify the bottom level,
if guest modify it, the bottom level is no-present, it also can broke
Point A's judgment and be checked by 'Point C'

> We need to move this to the top of the loop so we check all levels.  I
> guess this is why you needed to add a new check point.  But since we
> loop at least glevels times, we don't need two check points.
> 
  
> 
> Ok.   So moving the check to before point A, and s/level - 2/level - 1/
> should work, yes?
> 
> Should be slightly simpler since we don't need to kvm_mmu_put_page(sp,
> sptep) any more.

Yeah, it can work, but check all levels is really unnecessary, if guest not
modify the level, the check can be avoid.

This is why i choose two check-point, one is behind Point A's judgment, this
point checks the level which modified by guest, and another point is at mapping
last level point, this check is alway need.

> 
> Thanks for the detailed explanation.
> 

It's really my pleasure :-)


  reply	other threads:[~2010-07-05  8:49 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-07-01 13:53 [PATCH v4 1/6] KVM: MMU: introduce gfn_to_pfn_atomic() function Xiao Guangrong
2010-07-01 13:53 ` [PATCH v4 2/6] KVM: MMU: introduce gfn_to_page_many_atomic() function Xiao Guangrong
2010-07-01 13:54 ` [PATCH v4 3/6] KVM: MMU: introduce pte_prefetch_topup_memory_cache() Xiao Guangrong
2010-07-01 13:55 ` [PATCH v4 4/6] KVM: MMU: prefetch ptes when intercepted guest #PF Xiao Guangrong
2010-07-02 16:54   ` Marcelo Tosatti
2010-07-03  8:08     ` Xiao Guangrong
2010-07-05 12:01       ` Marcelo Tosatti
2010-07-06  0:50         ` Xiao Guangrong
2010-07-01 13:55 ` [PATCH v4 5/6] KVM: MMU: combine guest pte read between walk and pte prefetch Xiao Guangrong
2010-07-02 17:03   ` Marcelo Tosatti
2010-07-03 10:31     ` Xiao Guangrong
2010-07-03 12:08       ` Avi Kivity
2010-07-03 12:16         ` Xiao Guangrong
2010-07-03 12:26           ` Avi Kivity
2010-07-03 12:31             ` Xiao Guangrong
2010-07-03 12:44               ` Avi Kivity
2010-07-03 12:49                 ` Avi Kivity
2010-07-03 13:03                   ` Xiao Guangrong
2010-07-04 14:30                     ` Avi Kivity
2010-07-05  2:52                       ` Xiao Guangrong
2010-07-05  8:23                         ` Avi Kivity
2010-07-05  8:45                           ` Xiao Guangrong [this message]
2010-07-05  9:05                             ` Avi Kivity
2010-07-05  9:09                               ` Xiao Guangrong
2010-07-05  9:20                                 ` Avi Kivity
2010-07-05  9:31                                   ` Xiao Guangrong
2010-07-03 12:57                 ` Xiao Guangrong
2010-07-04 14:32                   ` Avi Kivity
2010-07-03 11:48     ` Avi Kivity
2010-07-01 13:56 ` [PATCH v4 6/6] KVM: MMU: trace " Xiao Guangrong
2010-07-02 16:47 ` [PATCH v4 1/6] KVM: MMU: introduce gfn_to_pfn_atomic() function Marcelo Tosatti
2010-07-03  3:13   ` Nick Piggin

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=4C319BBB.5020408@cn.fujitsu.com \
    --to=xiaoguangrong@cn.fujitsu.com \
    --cc=avi@redhat.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mtosatti@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