[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <a3e83e6b-4bfa-3a6b-4b43-5dd451e03254@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2019 12:04:53 +0100
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
To: Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>, Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@...el.com>,
"Dr . David Alan Gilbert" <dgilbert@...hat.com>,
Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 04/15] KVM: Implement ring-based dirty memory tracking
On 04/12/19 11:38, Jason Wang wrote:
>>
>> + entry = &ring->dirty_gfns[ring->dirty_index & (ring->size - 1)];
>> + entry->slot = slot;
>> + entry->offset = offset;
>
>
> Haven't gone through the whole series, sorry if it was a silly question
> but I wonder things like this will suffer from similar issue on
> virtually tagged archs as mentioned in [1].
There is no new infrastructure to track the dirty pages---it's just a
different way to pass them to userspace.
> Is this better to allocate the ring from userspace and set to KVM
> instead? Then we can use copy_to/from_user() friends (a little bit slow
> on recent CPUs).
Yeah, I don't think that would be better than mmap.
Paolo
> [1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/4/9/5
Powered by blists - more mailing lists