[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20201021172409.aids3y2mlyx776lx@linux.intel.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2020 01:24:09 +0800
From: Yu Zhang <yu.c.zhang@...ux.intel.com>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
Cc: Ben Gardon <bgardon@...gle.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
kvm@...r.kernel.org, Cannon Matthews <cannonmatthews@...gle.com>,
Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>,
Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@...el.com>,
Peter Shier <pshier@...gle.com>,
Peter Feiner <pfeiner@...gle.com>,
Junaid Shahid <junaids@...gle.com>,
Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>,
Yulei Zhang <yulei.kernel@...il.com>,
Wanpeng Li <kernellwp@...il.com>,
Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
Xiao Guangrong <xiaoguangrong.eric@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 07/20] kvm: x86/mmu: Support zapping SPTEs in the TDP
MMU
On Wed, Oct 21, 2020 at 07:20:15PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 21/10/20 17:02, Yu Zhang wrote:
> >> void kvm_tdp_mmu_free_root(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_mmu_page *root)
> >> {
> >> + gfn_t max_gfn = 1ULL << (boot_cpu_data.x86_phys_bits - PAGE_SHIFT);
> >> +
> > boot_cpu_data.x86_phys_bits is the host address width. Value of the guest's
> > may vary. So maybe we should just traverse the memslots and zap the gfn ranges
> > in each of them?
> >
>
> It must be smaller than the host value for two-dimensional paging, though.
Yes. And using boot_cpu_data.x86_phys_bits works, but won't it be somewhat
overkilling? E.g. for a host with 46 bits and a guest with 39 bits width?
Any concern for doing the zap by going through the memslots? Thanks. :)
B.R.
Yu
>
> Paolo
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists