[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <56CECF7E.3050801@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2016 10:55:10 +0100
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
To: Xiao Guangrong <guangrong.xiao@...ux.intel.com>,
Takuya Yoshikawa <yoshikawa_takuya_b1@....ntt.co.jp>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org
Cc: mtosatti@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/12] KVM: MMU: coalesce zapping page after
mmu_sync_children
On 25/02/2016 10:10, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
>
>
> On 02/25/2016 04:49 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 25/02/2016 08:35, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
>>>> This may release the mmu_lock before committing the zapping.
>>>> Is it safe? If so, we may want to see the reason in the changelog.
>>>
>>> It is unsafe indeed, please do not do it.
>>
>> Can you explain why? kvm_zap_obsolete_pages does the same.
>
> It's not the same, please see the comment in
> kvm_mmu_invalidate_zap_all_pages:
> /*
> * Notify all vcpus to reload its shadow page table
> * and flush TLB. Then all vcpus will switch to new
> * shadow page table with the new mmu_valid_gen.
> *
> * Note: we should do this under the protection of
> * mmu-lock, otherwise, vcpu would purge shadow page
> * but miss tlb flush.
> */
> kvm_reload_remote_mmus(kvm);
>
> That means the tlb is flushed before releasing mmu-lock.
>
> A example is in rmap_write_protect(), when KVM creates a shadow page
> table for
> the the guest, it detects no spte pointing to the gfn, so tlb is not
> flushed so
> that guest can freely updates its pte.
Then I'll do a different patch that checks need_resched||spin_needbreak,
and if so does commit+cond_resched_lock. I've removed 9/12 from
kvm/queue. Again, sorry for giving the impression that these patches
were already final.
Paolo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists