[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4BD412A0.1000101@redhat.com>
Date: Sun, 25 Apr 2010 13:00:00 +0300
From: Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
To: Xiao Guangrong <xiaoguangrong@...fujitsu.com>
CC: Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>,
KVM list <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 6/10] KVM MMU: don't write-protect if have new mapping
to unsync page
On 04/25/2010 10:00 AM, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> Two cases maybe happen in kvm_mmu_get_page() function:
>
> - one case is, the goal sp is already in cache, if the sp is unsync,
> we only need update it to assure this mapping is valid, but not
> mark it sync and not write-protect sp->gfn since it not broke unsync
> rule(one shadow page for a gfn)
>
> - another case is, the goal sp not existed, we need create a new sp
> for gfn, i.e, gfn (may)has another shadow page, to keep unsync rule,
> we should sync(mark sync and write-protect) gfn's unsync shadow page.
> After enabling multiple unsync shadows, we sync those shadow pages
> only when the new sp not allow to become unsync(also for the unsyc
> rule, the new rule is: allow all pte page become unsync)
>
Another interesting case is to create new shadow pages in the unsync
state. That can help when the guest starts a short lived process: we
can avoid write protecting its pagetables completely. Even if we do
sync them, we can sync them in a batch instead of one by one, saving IPIs.
--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
--
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