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, jike.song@intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 09/11] KVM: MMU: simplify mmu_need_write_protect
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2015 17:11:21 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <567BB6B9.3000200@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <567BAE8E.6080400@linux.intel.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1773 bytes --]
On 12/24/2015 04:36 PM, Kai Huang wrote:
>
>
> 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.
>
Make senses, the updated version is attached, count you review it?
[-- Attachment #2: 0009-KVM-MMU-simplify-mmu_need_write_protect.patch --]
[-- Type: text/x-patch, Size: 2200 bytes --]
>From a634f139dd9c8d0068f17b5c93cadcf979ac8acc Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Xiao Guangrong <guangrong.xiao@linux.intel.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2015 17:03:04 +0800
Subject: [PATCH 09/11] KVM: MMU: simplify mmu_need_write_protect
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 | 29 +++++++----------------------
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c
index 5a2ca73..d6be758 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c
@@ -2452,7 +2452,7 @@ int kvm_mmu_unprotect_page(struct kvm *kvm, gfn_t gfn)
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kvm_mmu_unprotect_page);
-static void __kvm_unsync_page(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm_mmu_page *sp)
+static void kvm_unsync_page(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, struct kvm_mmu_page *sp)
{
trace_kvm_mmu_unsync_page(sp);
++vcpu->kvm->stat.mmu_unsync;
@@ -2461,39 +2461,24 @@ 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)
-{
- struct kvm_mmu_page *s;
-
- for_each_gfn_indirect_valid_sp(vcpu->kvm, s, gfn) {
- if (s->unsync)
- continue;
- WARN_ON(s->role.level != PT_PAGE_TABLE_LEVEL);
- __kvm_unsync_page(vcpu, s);
- }
-}
-
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;
+ struct kvm_mmu_page *sp;
if (kvm_page_track_check_mode(vcpu, gfn, KVM_PAGE_TRACK_WRITE))
return true;
- for_each_gfn_indirect_valid_sp(vcpu->kvm, s, gfn) {
+ for_each_gfn_indirect_valid_sp(vcpu->kvm, sp, gfn) {
if (!can_unsync)
return true;
- if (s->role.level != PT_PAGE_TABLE_LEVEL)
- return true;
+ if (sp->unsync)
+ continue;
- if (!s->unsync)
- need_unsync = true;
+ WARN_ON(sp->role.level != PT_PAGE_TABLE_LEVEL);
+ kvm_unsync_page(vcpu, sp);
}
- if (need_unsync)
- kvm_unsync_pages(vcpu, gfn);
return false;
}
--
1.8.3.1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-12-24 9:18 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
2015-12-24 9:11 ` Xiao Guangrong [this message]
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=567BB6B9.3000200@linux.intel.com \
--to=guangrong.xiao@linux.intel.com \
--cc=gleb@kernel.org \
--cc=jike.song@intel.com \
--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