linux-kernel - Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH RFC] virtio: put last seen used index into ring itself

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20100511195208.GB10544@redhat.com>
Date:	Tue, 11 May 2010 22:52:08 +0300
From:	"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
To:	Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
Cc:	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
	qemu-devel@...gnu.org
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH RFC] virtio: put last seen used index into
	ring itself

On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 10:27:22PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 05/07/2010 06:23 AM, Rusty Russell wrote:
>> On Thu, 6 May 2010 07:30:00 pm Avi Kivity wrote:
>>    
>>> On 05/05/2010 11:58 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>>>      
>>>> +	/* We publish the last-seen used index at the end of the available ring.
>>>> +	 * It is at the end for backwards compatibility. */
>>>> +	vr->last_used_idx =&(vr)->avail->ring[num];
>>>> +	/* Verify that last used index does not spill over the used ring. */
>>>> +	BUG_ON((void *)vr->last_used_idx +
>>>> +	       sizeof *vr->last_used_idx>   (void *)vr->used);
>>>>    }
>>>>
>>>>        
>>> Shouldn't this be on its own cache line?
>>>      
>> It's next to the available ring; because that's where the guest publishes
>> its data.  That whole page is guest-write, host-read.
>>
>> Putting it on a cacheline by itself would be a slight pessimization; the host
>> cpu would have to get the last_used_idx cacheline and the avail descriptor
>> cacheline every time.  This way, they are sometimes the same cacheline.
>>    
>
> If one peer writes the tail of the available ring, while the other reads  
> last_used_idx, it's a false bounce, no?
>
> Having things on the same cacheline is only worthwhile if they are  
> accessed at the same time.

Yes, this is what I was trying to say.
avail flags and used index *are* accessed at the same time, so
there could be an advantage to sharing a cache line there.

All this should be kept in mind if we ever do
VIRTIO_RING_F_NEW_LAYOUT.

-- 
MST
--
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/