[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <51011C06.9090003@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 19:33:26 +0800
From: Xiao Guangrong <xiaoguangrong@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Gleb Natapov <gleb@...hat.com>
CC: Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>,
Avi Kivity <avi.kivity@...il.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, KVM <kvm@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 05/12] KVM: MMU: introduce vcpu_adjust_access
On 01/24/2013 06:36 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 06:06:36PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
>> Introduce it to split the code of adjusting pte_access from the large
>> function of set_spte
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Xiao Guangrong <xiaoguangrong@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
>> ---
>> arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c | 63 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------
>> 1 files changed, 40 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c
>> index af8bcb2..43b7e0c 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c
>> @@ -2324,25 +2324,18 @@ static int mmu_need_write_protect(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, gfn_t gfn,
>> return 0;
>> }
>>
>> -static int set_spte(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 *sptep,
>> - unsigned pte_access, int level,
>> - gfn_t gfn, pfn_t pfn, bool speculative,
>> - bool can_unsync, bool host_writable)
>> +/*
>> + * Return -1 if a race condition is detected, 1 if @gfn need to be
>> + * write-protected, otherwise 0 is returned.
>> + */
> That's a little bit crafty.
>
> Isn't it better to handle race condition in set_spte() explicitly?
> Something like do:
>
> if (host_writable && (pte_access & ACC_WRITE_MASK) &&
> level > PT_PAGE_TABLE_LEVEL && has_wrprotected_page(vcpu->kvm, gfn, level))
> return 0;
>
> before calling vcpu_adjust_access() in set_spte()?
>
> Or even do:
>
> if ((pte_access & ACC_WRITE_MASK) && level > PT_PAGE_TABLE_LEVEL &&
> has_wrprotected_page(vcpu->kvm, gfn, level))
> return 0;
>
> After calling vcpu_adjust_access().
>
> The later will create read only large page mapping where now it is not
> created, but it shouldn't be a problem as far as I see.
Yes. I like the later way. Will update it. Thanks for your suggestion, 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists