From: "Chen, Tiejun" <tiejun.chen@intel.com>
To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>
Cc: yang.z.zhang@intel.com, kevin.tian@intel.com, tim@xen.org,
xen-devel@lists.xen.org
Subject: Re: [v5][PATCH 1/2] xen:x86:mm:p2m: introduce set_identity_p2m_entry
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2014 19:08:33 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <53D780B1.70002@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <53D7933B02000078000273C1@mail.emea.novell.com>
On 2014/7/29 18:27, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 29.07.14 at 12:18, <tiejun.chen@intel.com> wrote:
>> On 2014/7/29 17:53, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>>> On 29.07.14 at 11:11, <tiejun.chen@intel.com> wrote:
>>>> On 2014/7/29 16:19, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>> ? Of course it may still be necessary to also inspect the obtained p2mt
>>>>> and a.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Are you saying this?
>>>>
>>>> if ( !p2m_is_valid(p2mt) ||
>>>> !mfn_valid(mfn) ||
>>>> (a != p2m_access_rw) )
>>>
>>> I'm afraid that's not enough context to know whether what you
>>> mean to do is sufficient. Plus !p2m_is_valid() is too weak. You
>>> simply need to properly think through what should happen if you
>>> find a valid mapping, but any of the tuple (mfn, p2mt, a) don't
>>> match what you intend to be there.
>>>
>>
>> Actually as I understand we can create these mapping only in one case of
>> !mfn_valid(mfn). For others scenarios we just return with that warning
>> message no matter what that tuple is explicitly. So here I try to
>> understand why you're saying we need check more by show this condition
>> combination.
>
> Perhaps, but with the exception that at least if the entire tuple
> matches you should return success (and not print anything).
> There might be further cases where an existing mapping would
> be good enough (like a being p2m_access_rwx), but perhaps
> there's not much point in trying to deal with them without explicit
> need.
>
I think the following cases should be enough:
#1: !mfn_valid(mfn)
We can create those mapping safely.
#2: mfn_x(mfn) == gfn && p2mt == p2m_mmio_direct && a == p2m_access_rw
We already have these matched mappings.
#3: Others
Return with that waring message: "Cannot identity map d%d:%lx, already
mapped to %lx but mismatch.\n"
So what about this?
@@ -858,6 +858,35 @@ int set_mmio_p2m_entry(struct domain *d, unsigned
long gfn, mfn_t mfn)
return set_typed_p2m_entry(d, gfn, mfn, p2m_mmio_direct);
}
+int set_identity_p2m_entry(struct domain *d, unsigned long gfn)
+{
+ p2m_type_t p2mt;
+ p2m_access_t a;
+ mfn_t mfn;
+ struct p2m_domain *p2m = p2m_get_hostp2m(d);
+ int ret = -EBUSY;
+
+ gfn_lock(p2m, gfn, 0);
+
+ mfn = p2m->get_entry(p2m, gfn, &p2mt, &a, 0, NULL);
+
+ if ( !mfn_valid(mfn) )
+ ret = p2m_set_entry(p2m, gfn, _mfn(gfn), PAGE_ORDER_4K,
p2m_mmio_direct,
+ p2m_access_rw);
+ else if ( mfn_x(mfn) == gfn &&
+ p2mt == p2m_mmio_direct &&
+ a == p2m_access_rw )
+ ret = 0;
+ else
+ printk(XENLOG_G_WARNING
+ "Cannot identity map d%d:%lx, already mapped to %lx but
mismatch.\n",
+ d->domain_id, gfn, mfn_x(mfn));
+
+ gfn_unlock(p2m, gfn, 0);
+
+ return ret;
+}
+
/* Returns: 0 for success, -errno for failure */
int clear_mmio_p2m_entry(struct domain *d, unsigned long gfn)
{
Thanks
Tiejun
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-07-29 11:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-07-29 6:40 [v5][PATCH 1/2] xen:x86:mm:p2m: introduce set_identity_p2m_entry Tiejun Chen
2014-07-29 6:40 ` [v5][PATCH 2/2] xen:vtd: missing RMRR mapping while share EPT Tiejun Chen
2014-07-29 7:05 ` [v5][PATCH 1/2] xen:x86:mm:p2m: introduce set_identity_p2m_entry Jan Beulich
2014-07-29 7:35 ` Chen, Tiejun
2014-07-29 8:19 ` Jan Beulich
2014-07-29 8:46 ` Andrew Cooper
2014-07-29 9:05 ` Jan Beulich
2014-07-29 9:20 ` Chen, Tiejun
2014-07-29 9:43 ` Andrew Cooper
2014-07-29 9:11 ` Chen, Tiejun
2014-07-29 9:53 ` Jan Beulich
2014-07-29 10:18 ` Chen, Tiejun
2014-07-29 10:27 ` Jan Beulich
2014-07-29 11:08 ` Chen, Tiejun [this message]
2014-07-29 11:29 ` Jan Beulich
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=53D780B1.70002@intel.com \
--to=tiejun.chen@intel.com \
--cc=JBeulich@suse.com \
--cc=kevin.tian@intel.com \
--cc=tim@xen.org \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xen.org \
--cc=yang.z.zhang@intel.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).