[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YC6UmukeFlrdWAxe@google.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2021 08:23:54 -0800
From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
Cc: Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@...cent.com>,
Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>,
Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ben Gardon <bgardon@...gle.com>,
Makarand Sonare <makarandsonare@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/14] KVM: x86/mmu: Consult max mapping level when
zapping collapsible SPTEs
On Thu, Feb 18, 2021, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 13/02/21 01:50, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> >
> > pfn = spte_to_pfn(iter.old_spte);
> > if (kvm_is_reserved_pfn(pfn) ||
> > - (!PageTransCompoundMap(pfn_to_page(pfn)) &&
> > - !kvm_is_zone_device_pfn(pfn)))
> > + iter.level >= kvm_mmu_max_mapping_level(kvm, slot, iter.gfn,
> > + pfn, PG_LEVEL_NUM))
> > continue;
>
>
> This changes the test to PageCompound. Is it worth moving the change to
> patch 1?
Yes? I originally did that in a separate patch, then changed my mind.
If PageTransCompoundMap() also detects HugeTLB pages, then it is the "better"
option as it checks that the page is actually mapped huge. I dropped the change
because PageTransCompound() is just a wrapper around PageCompound(), and so I
assumed PageTransCompoundMap() would detect HugeTLB pages, too. I'm not so sure
about that after rereading the code, yet again.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists