[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20121204234829.65472b5ec4aedcf86cccc05f@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2012 23:48:29 +0900
From: Takuya Yoshikawa <takuya.yoshikawa@...il.com>
To: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>
Cc: mtosatti@...hat.com, kvm@...r.kernel.org, gleb@...hat.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/6] kvm: Growable memory slot array
On Mon, 03 Dec 2012 16:39:05 -0700
Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com> wrote:
> A couple notes/questions; in the previous version we had a
> kvm_arch_flush_shadow() call when we increased the number of slots.
> I'm not sure if this is still necessary. I had also made the x86
> specific slot_bitmap dynamically grow as well and switch between a
> direct bitmap and indirect pointer to a bitmap. That may have
> contributed to needing the flush. I haven't done that yet here
> because it seems like an unnecessary complication if we have a max
> on the order of 512 or 1024 entries. A bit per slot isn't a lot of
> overhead. If we want to go more, maybe we should make it switch.
I have a patch set which removes the slot_bitmap in kvm mmu page
by using reverse mappings for write protecting a memslot.
A bit of concern I still have is the total write protection time
for large memslots. But since this approach allows us to control
mmu_lock hold time, I think this is a reasonable trade-off.
... and this should be much better than introducing any complication
for slot_bitmap handling.
Thanks,
Takuya
--
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