[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <468EADB9.9050802@goop.org>
Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2007 14:01:45 -0700
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
To: Zachary Amsden <zach@...are.com>
CC: Chris Wright <chrisw@...s-sol.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
virtualization@...ts.osdl.org,
Stefan Richter <stefanr@...6.in-berlin.de>,
"Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday@...dspring.com>,
Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@...ibm.com>,
Carsten Otte <cotte@...ibm.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] VMI: remove CONFIG_DEBUG_PAGE_TYPE and associated bitrotted
code
Zachary Amsden wrote:
> I though about it, but it gets really ugly. You need wrappers for all
> the MMU ops in pvops generic code, which means either another layer of
> wrappers or a bunch of CONFIG_DEBUG_PARAVIRT
Oh, yes, more wrappers please! We could do it at the paravirt_ops
level: set up your pv_ops, then call paravirt_debug_mmuops(), which
would save away your ops and replace them with wrappers. That basic
structure would lend itself to all kinds of paravirt-level debugging tools.
It would be a bit more elegant if we had mmu_ops. Maybe we should do
that splitup before 64bit?
> only things that are easy to break because they also depend on PAE vs.
> non-PAE.
Hm, would they? Would they need to inspect the content of the pte_t
(etc), or just look at the struct page for the page being updated? (pmd
operations being a bit more awkward, of course.)
> It's doable, though, and might even be extensible to s390 for CMM page
> type debugging, as well as descriptor type tracking and enforcement of
> page isolation of GDTs.
>
> Page state tracking could track -
>
> PAGE_ZERO, PAGE_UNUSED, PAGE_STABLE, PAGE_VOLATILE,
> PAGE_POTENTIALLY_VOLATILE, PAGE_L1{2/3/4}, PAGE_LDT, PAGE_GDT,
>
> actually, no this seems silly, since we'd just be duplicating bits for
> the page types, so the only debug benefit is ensuring the intersection
> of volatile and L{1/2/3/4} is nil, which is already trivially
> verifiable by inspection.
Well, I have to say that keeping the hypervisor hints in sync with the
actual kernel-level page state worries me, so any debug tools which
could help there would be good. This seems like it should be the right
place to do it, but I can't say I've thought about it in any detail.
Of course, if it *is* helpful to the page hinting patches, then it
suggests that it's a facility with wider scope than pv-ops.
J
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists