[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <7cb42373-355c-7cb3-2979-9529aef0641c@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2017 13:14:27 +0200
From: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
To: Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...hat.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mips@...ux-mips.org, kvm-ppc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Christoffer Dall <cdall@...aro.org>,
Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@....com>,
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>,
Cornelia Huck <cohuck@...hat.com>,
James Hogan <james.hogan@...tec.com>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...abs.org>,
Alexander Graf <agraf@...e.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 2/2] KVM: RCU protected dynamic vcpus array
> atomic_set(&kvm->online_vcpus, 0);
> mutex_unlock(&kvm->lock);
> diff --git a/include/linux/kvm_host.h b/include/linux/kvm_host.h
> index c8df733eed41..eb9fb5b493ac 100644
> --- a/include/linux/kvm_host.h
> +++ b/include/linux/kvm_host.h
> @@ -386,12 +386,17 @@ struct kvm_memslots {
> int used_slots;
> };
>
> +struct kvm_vcpus {
> + u32 online;
> + struct kvm_vcpu *array[];
On option could be to simply chunk it:
+struct kvm_vcpus {
+ struct kvm_vcpu vcpus[32];
+};
+
/*
* Note:
* memslots are not sorted by id anymore, please use id_to_memslot()
@@ -391,7 +395,7 @@ struct kvm {
struct mutex slots_lock;
struct mm_struct *mm; /* userspace tied to this vm */
struct kvm_memslots __rcu *memslots[KVM_ADDRESS_SPACE_NUM];
- struct kvm_vcpu *vcpus[KVM_MAX_VCPUS];
+ struct kvm_vcpus vcpus[(KVM_MAX_VCPUS + 31) / 32];
/*
* created_vcpus is protected by kvm->lock, and is incremented
@@ -483,12 +487,14 @@ static inline struct kvm_io_bus
*kvm_get_bus(struct kvm *kvm, enum kvm_bus idx)
1. make nobody access kvm->vcpus directly (factor out)
2. allocate next chunk if necessary when creating a VCPU and store
pointer using WRITE_ONCE
3. use READ_ONCE to test for availability of the current chunk
kvm_for_each_vcpu just has to use READ_ONCE to access/test for the right
chunk. Pointers never get invalid. No RCU needed. Sleeping in the loop
is possible.
--
Thanks,
David
Powered by blists - more mailing lists