From: Xiao Guangrong <guangrong.xiao@linux.intel.com>
To: Kai Huang <kai.huang@linux.intel.com>, pbonzini@redhat.com
Cc: gleb@kernel.org, mtosatti@redhat.com, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/11] KVM: MMU: simplify mmu_need_write_protect
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2015 17:25:10 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <566FDC76.1090703@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <566FD2A1.7010601@linux.intel.com>
On 12/15/2015 04:43 PM, Kai Huang wrote:
>
>
> On 12/01/2015 02:26 AM, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
>> Now, all non-leaf shadow page are page tracked, if gfn is not tracked
>> there is no non-leaf shadow page of gfn is existed, we can directly
>> make the shadow page of gfn to unsync
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Xiao Guangrong <guangrong.xiao@linux.intel.com>
>> ---
>> arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c | 26 ++++++++------------------
>> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c
>> index 5a2ca73..f89e77f 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c
>> @@ -2461,41 +2461,31 @@ static void __kvm_unsync_page(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm_mmu_page *sp)
>> kvm_mmu_mark_parents_unsync(sp);
>> }
>> -static void kvm_unsync_pages(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, gfn_t gfn)
>> +static bool kvm_unsync_pages(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, gfn_t gfn,
>> + bool can_unsync)
>> {
>> struct kvm_mmu_page *s;
>> for_each_gfn_indirect_valid_sp(vcpu->kvm, s, gfn) {
>> + if (!can_unsync)
>> + return true;
> How about moving this right before for_each_gfn_indirect_valid_sp? As can_unsync is passed as
> parameter, so there's no point checking it several times.
>
We can not do this. What we are doing here is checking if we have shadow page mapping
for 'gfn':
a) if no, it can be writable.
b) if yes, check 'can_unsync' to see if these shadow pages can make to be 'unsync'.
Your suggestion can break the point a).
> A further thinking is can we move it to mmu_need_write_protect? Passing can_unsync as parameter to
> kvm_unsync_pages sounds a little bit odd.
>
>> +
>> if (s->unsync)
>> continue;
>> WARN_ON(s->role.level != PT_PAGE_TABLE_LEVEL);
> How about large page mapping? Such as if guest uses 2M mapping and its shadow is indirect, does
> above WARN_ON still meet? As you removed the PT level check in mmu_need_write_protect.
The lager mapping are on the non-leaf shadow pages which can be figured out by
kvm_page_track_check_mode() before we call this function.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-12-15 9:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-11-30 18:26 [PATCH 00/11] KVM: x86: track guest page access Xiao Guangrong
2015-11-30 18:26 ` [PATCH 01/11] KVM: MMU: rename has_wrprotected_page to mmu_gfn_lpage_is_disallowed Xiao Guangrong
2015-11-30 18:26 ` [PATCH 02/11] KVM: MMU: introduce kvm_mmu_gfn_{allow,disallow}_lpage Xiao Guangrong
2015-11-30 18:26 ` [PATCH 03/11] KVM: MMU: introduce kvm_mmu_slot_gfn_write_protect Xiao Guangrong
2015-11-30 18:26 ` [PATCH 04/11] KVM: page track: add the framework of guest page tracking Xiao Guangrong
2015-12-15 7:06 ` Kai Huang
2015-12-15 8:46 ` Xiao Guangrong
2015-12-16 7:33 ` Kai Huang
2015-11-30 18:26 ` [PATCH 05/11] KVM: page track: introduce kvm_page_track_{add,remove}_page Xiao Guangrong
2015-12-15 7:15 ` Kai Huang
2015-12-15 7:56 ` Kai Huang
2015-11-30 18:26 ` [PATCH 06/11] KVM: MMU: let page fault handler be aware tracked page Xiao Guangrong
2015-12-15 8:11 ` Kai Huang
2015-12-15 9:03 ` Xiao Guangrong
2015-12-16 7:31 ` Kai Huang
2015-12-16 8:23 ` Xiao Guangrong
2015-11-30 18:26 ` [PATCH 07/11] KVM: page track: add notifier support Xiao Guangrong
2015-12-16 5:53 ` Jike Song
2015-12-16 6:26 ` Xiao Guangrong
2015-11-30 18:26 ` [PATCH 08/11] KVM: MMU: use page track for non-leaf shadow pages Xiao Guangrong
2015-12-15 7:52 ` Kai Huang
2015-12-15 7:59 ` Kai Huang
2015-12-15 9:10 ` Xiao Guangrong
2015-12-16 7:51 ` Kai Huang
2015-12-16 8:39 ` Xiao Guangrong
2015-12-17 2:44 ` Kai Huang
2015-12-17 4:07 ` Xiao Guangrong
2015-11-30 18:26 ` [PATCH 09/11] KVM: MMU: simplify mmu_need_write_protect Xiao Guangrong
2015-12-15 8:43 ` Kai Huang
2015-12-15 8:47 ` Kai Huang
2015-12-15 9:26 ` Xiao Guangrong
2015-12-15 9:25 ` Xiao Guangrong [this message]
2015-12-16 8:05 ` Kai Huang
2015-12-16 8:48 ` Xiao Guangrong
2015-12-17 2:51 ` Kai Huang
2015-11-30 18:26 ` [PATCH 10/11] KVM: MMU: clear write-flooding on the fast path of tracked page Xiao Guangrong
2015-11-30 18:26 ` [PATCH 11/11] KVM: MMU: apply page track notifier Xiao Guangrong
2015-12-01 10:17 ` [PATCH 00/11] KVM: x86: track guest page access Paolo Bonzini
2015-12-01 15:02 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2015-12-01 15:08 ` Paolo Bonzini
2015-12-01 17:00 ` Xiao Guangrong
2015-12-05 16:56 ` Xiao Guangrong
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=566FDC76.1090703@linux.intel.com \
--to=guangrong.xiao@linux.intel.com \
--cc=gleb@kernel.org \
--cc=kai.huang@linux.intel.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mtosatti@redhat.com \
--cc=pbonzini@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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).