public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Kai Huang <kai.huang@linux.intel.com>
To: Xiao Guangrong <guangrong.xiao@linux.intel.com>, pbonzini@redhat.com
Cc: gleb@kernel.org, mtosatti@redhat.com, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jike.song@intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 09/11] KVM: MMU: simplify mmu_need_write_protect
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2015 16:36:30 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <567BAE8E.6080400@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1450869954-30273-10-git-send-email-guangrong.xiao@linux.intel.com>



On 12/23/2015 07:25 PM, 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;
> +
>   		if (s->unsync)
>   			continue;
>   		WARN_ON(s->role.level != PT_PAGE_TABLE_LEVEL);
>   		__kvm_unsync_page(vcpu, s);
>   	}
> +
> +	return false;
>   }
I hate to say but it looks odd to me that kvm_unsync_pages takes a bool 
parameter called can_unsync, and return a bool (which looks like 
suggesting whether the unsync has succeeded or not). How about calling 
__kvm_unsync_pages directly in mmu_need_write_protect, and leave 
kvm_unsync_pages unchanged (or even remove it as looks it is used 
nowhere else) ? But again it's to you and Paolo.

Thanks,
-Kai
>   
>   static bool mmu_need_write_protect(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, gfn_t gfn,
>   				   bool can_unsync)
>   {
> -	struct kvm_mmu_page *s;
> -	bool need_unsync = false;
> -
>   	if (kvm_page_track_check_mode(vcpu, gfn, KVM_PAGE_TRACK_WRITE))
>   		return true;
>   
> -	for_each_gfn_indirect_valid_sp(vcpu->kvm, s, gfn) {
> -		if (!can_unsync)
> -			return true;
> -
> -		if (s->role.level != PT_PAGE_TABLE_LEVEL)
> -			return true;
> -
> -		if (!s->unsync)
> -			need_unsync = true;
> -	}
> -	if (need_unsync)
> -		kvm_unsync_pages(vcpu, gfn);
> -
> -	return false;
> +	return kvm_unsync_pages(vcpu, gfn, can_unsync);
>   }
>   
>   static bool kvm_is_mmio_pfn(pfn_t pfn)


  reply	other threads:[~2015-12-24  8:40 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-12-23 11:25 [PATCH v2 00/11] KVM: x86: track guest page access Xiao Guangrong
2015-12-23 11:25 ` [PATCH v2 01/11] KVM: MMU: rename has_wrprotected_page to mmu_gfn_lpage_is_disallowed Xiao Guangrong
2015-12-23 11:25 ` [PATCH v2 02/11] KVM: MMU: introduce kvm_mmu_gfn_{allow,disallow}_lpage Xiao Guangrong
2015-12-23 11:25 ` [PATCH v2 03/11] KVM: MMU: introduce kvm_mmu_slot_gfn_write_protect Xiao Guangrong
2015-12-23 11:25 ` [PATCH v2 04/11] KVM: page track: add the framework of guest page tracking Xiao Guangrong
2015-12-23 11:25 ` [PATCH v2 05/11] KVM: page track: introduce kvm_page_track_{add,remove}_page Xiao Guangrong
2015-12-23 11:25 ` [PATCH v2 06/11] KVM: MMU: let page fault handler be aware tracked page Xiao Guangrong
2015-12-23 11:25 ` [PATCH v2 07/11] KVM: page track: add notifier support Xiao Guangrong
2015-12-23 11:25 ` [PATCH v2 08/11] KVM: MMU: use page track for non-leaf shadow pages Xiao Guangrong
2015-12-23 11:25 ` [PATCH v2 09/11] KVM: MMU: simplify mmu_need_write_protect Xiao Guangrong
2015-12-24  8:36   ` Kai Huang [this message]
2015-12-24  9:11     ` Xiao Guangrong
2015-12-24  9:21       ` Kai Huang
2015-12-23 11:25 ` [PATCH v2 10/11] KVM: MMU: clear write-flooding on the fast path of tracked page Xiao Guangrong
2015-12-23 11:25 ` [PATCH v2 11/11] KVM: MMU: apply page track notifier 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=567BAE8E.6080400@linux.intel.com \
    --to=kai.huang@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=gleb@kernel.org \
    --cc=guangrong.xiao@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=jike.song@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