[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4F8B915B.9080407@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2012 11:26:19 +0800
From: Xiao Guangrong <xiaoguangrong@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Takuya Yoshikawa <takuya.yoshikawa@...il.com>
CC: Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>, Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, KVM <kvm@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 03/16] KVM: MMU: properly assert spte on rmap walking
path
On 04/14/2012 10:15 AM, Takuya Yoshikawa wrote:
> On Fri, 13 Apr 2012 18:10:45 +0800
> Xiao Guangrong <xiaoguangrong@...ux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>
>> static u64 *rmap_get_next(struct rmap_iterator *iter)
>> {
>> + u64 *sptep = NULL;
>> +
>> if (iter->desc) {
>> if (iter->pos < PTE_LIST_EXT - 1) {
>> - u64 *sptep;
>> -
>> ++iter->pos;
>> sptep = iter->desc->sptes[iter->pos];
>> if (sptep)
>> - return sptep;
>> + goto exit;
>> }
>>
>> iter->desc = iter->desc->more;
>> @@ -1028,11 +1036,14 @@ static u64 *rmap_get_next(struct rmap_iterator *iter)
>> if (iter->desc) {
>> iter->pos = 0;
>> /* desc->sptes[0] cannot be NULL */
>> - return iter->desc->sptes[iter->pos];
>> + sptep = iter->desc->sptes[iter->pos];
>> + goto exit;
>> }
>> }
>>
>> - return NULL;
>> +exit:
>> + WARN_ON(sptep && !is_shadow_present_pte(*sptep));
>> + return sptep;
>> }
>
> This will, probably, again force rmap_get_next function-call even with EPT/NPT:
> CPU cannot skip it by branch prediction.
>
No, EPT/NPT also needs it.
--
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