[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <53F20653.2030204@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2014 15:57:39 +0200
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
To: Xiao Guangrong <xiaoguangrong@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, gleb@...nel.org
CC: avi.kivity@...il.com, mtosatti@...hat.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
stable@...r.kernel.org, David Matlack <dmatlack@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] KVM: fix cache stale memslot info with correct mmio
generation number
Il 14/08/2014 09:01, Xiao Guangrong ha scritto:
> - update_memslots(slots, new, kvm->memslots->generation);
> + /* ensure generation number is always increased. */
> + slots->generation = old_memslots->generation;
> + update_memslots(slots, new);
> rcu_assign_pointer(kvm->memslots, slots);
> synchronize_srcu_expedited(&kvm->srcu);
> + slots->generation++;
I don't trust my brain enough to review this patch.
kvm_current_mmio_generation seems like a very bad (race-prone) API. One
patch I trust myself reviewing would change a bunch of functions in
kvm_main.c to take a memslots struct. This would make it easy to
respect the hard and fast rule of not dereferencing the same pointer
twice. But it would be a tedious change.
Another alternative could be to use the low bit to mark an in-progress
change, and skip the caching if the low bit is set. Similar to a
seqcount (except if read_seqcount_retry fails, we just punt and not
retry anything), you could use it even though the memory barriers
provided by write_seqcount_begin/end are not too useful in this case.
Paolo
--
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