linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 1/7] KVM: MMU: fix release noslot pfn

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: <20120924112416.GA23096@redhat.com>
Date:	Mon, 24 Sep 2012 13:24:16 +0200
From:	Gleb Natapov <gleb@...hat.com>
To:	Xiao Guangrong <xiaoguangrong@...ux.vnet.ibm.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 v3 1/7] KVM: MMU: fix release noslot pfn

On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 12:59:32PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> On 09/23/2012 05:13 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 02:57:19PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> >> We can not directly call kvm_release_pfn_clean to release the pfn
> >> since we can meet noslot pfn which is used to cache mmio info into
> >> spte
> >>
> > Wouldn't it be better to move the check into kvm_release_pfn_clean()?
> 
> I think there is no reason for us to prefer to adding this branch in
> the common code. :)

Is the function performance critical? Is function called without the check
on a hot path?  The function already contains much heavier kvm_is_mmio_pfn()
check. If most/all function invocation require check before call it's
better to move it inside.
 
--
			Gleb.
--
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/