[Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/2] qemu-kvm: Introduce wrapper functions to access phys_ram_dirty, and replace existing direct accesses to it.

[Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/2] qemu-kvm: Introduce wrapper functions to access phys_ram_dirty, and replace existing direct accesses to it.

[Yoshiaki Tamura]

Before replacing byte-based dirty bitmap with bit-based dirty bitmap,
clearing direct accesses to the bitmap first seems to be good point to
start with.

This patch set is based on the following discussion.

http://www.mail-archive.com/kvm@vger.kernel.org/msg30724.html

Thanks,

Yoshi

[Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/2] qemu-kvm: Introduce wrapper functions to access phys_ram_dirty.

[Yoshiaki Tamura]

Adds wrapper functions to prevent direct access to the phys_ram_dirty bitmap.

Signed-off-by: Yoshiaki Tamura <tamura.yoshiaki@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Signed-off-by: OHMURA Kei <ohmura.kei@lab.ntt.co.jp>
---
 cpu-all.h |   25 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

diff --git a/cpu-all.h b/cpu-all.h
index 9bc01b9..c279c0a 100644
--- a/cpu-all.h
+++ b/cpu-all.h
@@ -882,6 +882,11 @@ static inline int cpu_physical_memory_is_dirty(ram_addr_t addr)
     return phys_ram_dirty[addr >> TARGET_PAGE_BITS] == 0xff;
 }
 
+static inline int cpu_physical_memory_get_dirty_flags(ram_addr_t addr)
+{
+    return phys_ram_dirty[addr >> TARGET_PAGE_BITS];
+}
+
 static inline int cpu_physical_memory_get_dirty(ram_addr_t addr,
                                                 int dirty_flags)
 {
@@ -893,6 +898,26 @@ static inline void cpu_physical_memory_set_dirty(ram_addr_t addr)
     phys_ram_dirty[addr >> TARGET_PAGE_BITS] = 0xff;
 }
 
+static inline int cpu_physical_memory_set_dirty_flags(ram_addr_t addr,
+                                                      int dirty_flags)
+{
+    return phys_ram_dirty[addr >> TARGET_PAGE_BITS] |= dirty_flags;
+}
+
+static inline void cpu_physical_memory_mask_dirty_range(ram_addr_t start,
+                                                        int length,
+                                                        int dirty_flags)
+{
+    int i, mask, len;
+    uint8_t *p;
+
+    len = length >> TARGET_PAGE_BITS;
+    mask = ~dirty_flags;
+    p = phys_ram_dirty + (start >> TARGET_PAGE_BITS);
+    for (i = 0; i < len; i++)
+        p[i] &= mask;
+}
+
 void cpu_physical_memory_reset_dirty(ram_addr_t start, ram_addr_t end,
                                      int dirty_flags);
 void cpu_tlb_update_dirty(CPUState *env);
-- 
1.7.0.31.g1df487

[Qemu-devel] [PATCH 2/2] qemu-kvm: Replace direct phys_ram_dirty access with wrapper functions.

[Yoshiaki Tamura]

Replaces direct phys_ram_dirty access with wrapper functions to prevent
direct access to the phys_ram_dirty bitmap.

Signed-off-by: Yoshiaki Tamura <tamura.yoshiaki@lab.ntt.co.jp>
Signed-off-by: OHMURA Kei <ohmura.kei@lab.ntt.co.jp>
---
 exec.c |   45 ++++++++++++++++++++-------------------------
 1 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)

diff --git a/exec.c b/exec.c
index 9bcb4de..b607212 100644
--- a/exec.c
+++ b/exec.c
@@ -1944,7 +1944,7 @@ static void tlb_protect_code(ram_addr_t ram_addr)
 static void tlb_unprotect_code_phys(CPUState *env, ram_addr_t ram_addr,
                                     target_ulong vaddr)
 {
-    phys_ram_dirty[ram_addr >> TARGET_PAGE_BITS] |= CODE_DIRTY_FLAG;
+    cpu_physical_memory_set_dirty_flags(ram_addr, CODE_DIRTY_FLAG);
 }
 
 static inline void tlb_reset_dirty_range(CPUTLBEntry *tlb_entry,
@@ -1965,8 +1965,7 @@ void cpu_physical_memory_reset_dirty(ram_addr_t start, ram_addr_t end,
 {
     CPUState *env;
     unsigned long length, start1;
-    int i, mask, len;
-    uint8_t *p;
+    int i;
 
     start &= TARGET_PAGE_MASK;
     end = TARGET_PAGE_ALIGN(end);
@@ -1974,11 +1973,7 @@ void cpu_physical_memory_reset_dirty(ram_addr_t start, ram_addr_t end,
     length = end - start;
     if (length == 0)
         return;
-    len = length >> TARGET_PAGE_BITS;
-    mask = ~dirty_flags;
-    p = phys_ram_dirty + (start >> TARGET_PAGE_BITS);
-    for(i = 0; i < len; i++)
-        p[i] &= mask;
+    cpu_physical_memory_mask_dirty_range(start, length, dirty_flags);    
 
     /* we modify the TLB cache so that the dirty bit will be set again
        when accessing the range */
@@ -2825,16 +2820,16 @@ static void notdirty_mem_writeb(void *opaque, target_phys_addr_t ram_addr,
                                 uint32_t val)
 {
     int dirty_flags;
-    dirty_flags = phys_ram_dirty[ram_addr >> TARGET_PAGE_BITS];
+    dirty_flags = cpu_physical_memory_get_dirty_flags(ram_addr);
     if (!(dirty_flags & CODE_DIRTY_FLAG)) {
 #if !defined(CONFIG_USER_ONLY)
         tb_invalidate_phys_page_fast(ram_addr, 1);
-        dirty_flags = phys_ram_dirty[ram_addr >> TARGET_PAGE_BITS];
+        dirty_flags = cpu_physical_memory_get_dirty_flags(ram_addr);
 #endif
     }
     stb_p(qemu_get_ram_ptr(ram_addr), val);
     dirty_flags |= (0xff & ~CODE_DIRTY_FLAG);
-    phys_ram_dirty[ram_addr >> TARGET_PAGE_BITS] = dirty_flags;
+    cpu_physical_memory_set_dirty_flags(ram_addr, dirty_flags);
     /* we remove the notdirty callback only if the code has been
        flushed */
     if (dirty_flags == 0xff)
@@ -2845,16 +2840,16 @@ static void notdirty_mem_writew(void *opaque, target_phys_addr_t ram_addr,
                                 uint32_t val)
 {
     int dirty_flags;
-    dirty_flags = phys_ram_dirty[ram_addr >> TARGET_PAGE_BITS];
+    dirty_flags = cpu_physical_memory_get_dirty_flags(ram_addr);
     if (!(dirty_flags & CODE_DIRTY_FLAG)) {
 #if !defined(CONFIG_USER_ONLY)
         tb_invalidate_phys_page_fast(ram_addr, 2);
-        dirty_flags = phys_ram_dirty[ram_addr >> TARGET_PAGE_BITS];
+        dirty_flags = cpu_physical_memory_get_dirty_flags(ram_addr);
 #endif
     }
     stw_p(qemu_get_ram_ptr(ram_addr), val);
     dirty_flags |= (0xff & ~CODE_DIRTY_FLAG);
-    phys_ram_dirty[ram_addr >> TARGET_PAGE_BITS] = dirty_flags;
+    cpu_physical_memory_set_dirty_flags(ram_addr, dirty_flags);
     /* we remove the notdirty callback only if the code has been
        flushed */
     if (dirty_flags == 0xff)
@@ -2865,16 +2860,16 @@ static void notdirty_mem_writel(void *opaque, target_phys_addr_t ram_addr,
                                 uint32_t val)
 {
     int dirty_flags;
-    dirty_flags = phys_ram_dirty[ram_addr >> TARGET_PAGE_BITS];
+    dirty_flags = cpu_physical_memory_get_dirty_flags(ram_addr);
     if (!(dirty_flags & CODE_DIRTY_FLAG)) {
 #if !defined(CONFIG_USER_ONLY)
         tb_invalidate_phys_page_fast(ram_addr, 4);
-        dirty_flags = phys_ram_dirty[ram_addr >> TARGET_PAGE_BITS];
+        dirty_flags = cpu_physical_memory_get_dirty_flags(ram_addr);
 #endif
     }
     stl_p(qemu_get_ram_ptr(ram_addr), val);
     dirty_flags |= (0xff & ~CODE_DIRTY_FLAG);
-    phys_ram_dirty[ram_addr >> TARGET_PAGE_BITS] = dirty_flags;
+    cpu_physical_memory_set_dirty_flags(ram_addr, dirty_flags);
     /* we remove the notdirty callback only if the code has been
        flushed */
     if (dirty_flags == 0xff)
@@ -3325,8 +3320,8 @@ void cpu_physical_memory_rw(target_phys_addr_t addr, uint8_t *buf,
                     /* invalidate code */
                     tb_invalidate_phys_page_range(addr1, addr1 + l, 0);
                     /* set dirty bit */
-                    phys_ram_dirty[addr1 >> TARGET_PAGE_BITS] |=
-                        (0xff & ~CODE_DIRTY_FLAG);
+                    cpu_physical_memory_set_dirty_flags(
+                        addr1, (0xff & ~CODE_DIRTY_FLAG));
                 }
 		/* qemu doesn't execute guest code directly, but kvm does
 		   therefore flush instruction caches */
@@ -3539,8 +3534,8 @@ void cpu_physical_memory_unmap(void *buffer, target_phys_addr_t len,
                     /* invalidate code */
                     tb_invalidate_phys_page_range(addr1, addr1 + l, 0);
                     /* set dirty bit */
-                    phys_ram_dirty[addr1 >> TARGET_PAGE_BITS] |=
-                        (0xff & ~CODE_DIRTY_FLAG);
+                    cpu_physical_memory_set_dirty_flags(
+                        addr1, (0xff & ~CODE_DIRTY_FLAG));
                 }
                 addr1 += l;
                 access_len -= l;
@@ -3676,8 +3671,8 @@ void stl_phys_notdirty(target_phys_addr_t addr, uint32_t val)
                 /* invalidate code */
                 tb_invalidate_phys_page_range(addr1, addr1 + 4, 0);
                 /* set dirty bit */
-                phys_ram_dirty[addr1 >> TARGET_PAGE_BITS] |=
-                    (0xff & ~CODE_DIRTY_FLAG);
+                cpu_physical_memory_set_dirty_flags(
+                    addr1, (0xff & ~CODE_DIRTY_FLAG));
             }
         }
     }
@@ -3745,8 +3740,8 @@ void stl_phys(target_phys_addr_t addr, uint32_t val)
             /* invalidate code */
             tb_invalidate_phys_page_range(addr1, addr1 + 4, 0);
             /* set dirty bit */
-            phys_ram_dirty[addr1 >> TARGET_PAGE_BITS] |=
-                (0xff & ~CODE_DIRTY_FLAG);
+            cpu_physical_memory_set_dirty_flags(addr1,
+                (0xff & ~CODE_DIRTY_FLAG));
         }
     }
 }
-- 
1.7.0.31.g1df487

[Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 0/2] qemu-kvm: Introduce wrapper functions to access phys_ram_dirty, and replace existing direct accesses to it.

[Marcelo Tosatti]

On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 02:51:46PM +0900, Yoshiaki Tamura wrote:
> 
> Before replacing byte-based dirty bitmap with bit-based dirty bitmap,
> clearing direct accesses to the bitmap first seems to be good point to
> start with.
> 
> This patch set is based on the following discussion.
> 
> http://www.mail-archive.com/kvm@vger.kernel.org/msg30724.html
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Yoshi

Looks fine to me.

This is qemu upstream material, though.

[Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 0/2] qemu-kvm: Introduce wrapper functions to access phys_ram_dirty, and replace existing direct accesses to it.

[Yoshiaki Tamura]

Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 02:51:46PM +0900, Yoshiaki Tamura wrote:
>>
>> Before replacing byte-based dirty bitmap with bit-based dirty bitmap,
>> clearing direct accesses to the bitmap first seems to be good point to
>> start with.
>>
>> This patch set is based on the following discussion.
>>
>> http://www.mail-archive.com/kvm@vger.kernel.org/msg30724.html
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Yoshi
>
> Looks fine to me.
>
> This is qemu upstream material, though.

Thanks for your comment.
I should have removed qemu-kvm from the title.

Should I rebase the patch to qemu.git and repost?