[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87sg2123pj.wl-maz@kernel.org>
Date: Tue, 01 Jun 2021 13:02:00 +0100
From: Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>
To: Quentin Perret <qperret@...gle.com>
Cc: will@...nel.org, james.morse@....com, alexandru.elisei@....com,
catalin.marinas@....com, suzuki.poulose@....com,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, kvmarm@...ts.cs.columbia.edu,
kernel-team@...roid.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/7] KVM: arm64: Move hyp_pool locking out of refcount helpers
On Thu, 27 May 2021 13:51:28 +0100,
Quentin Perret <qperret@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> The hyp_page refcount helpers currently rely on the hyp_pool lock for
> serialization. However, this means the refcounts can't be changed from
> the buddy allocator core as it already holds the lock, which means pages
> have to go through odd transient states.
>
> For example, when a page is freed, its refcount is set to 0, and the
> lock is transiently released before the page can be attached to a free
> list in the buddy tree. This is currently harmless as the allocator
> checks the list node of each page to see if it is available for
> allocation or not, but it means the page refcount can't be trusted to
> represent the state of the page even if the pool lock is held.
>
> In order to fix this, remove the pool locking from the refcount helpers,
> and move all the logic to the buddy allocator. This will simplify the
> removal of the list node from struct hyp_page in a later patch.
Is there any chance some documentation could be added so that we have
a record of what the locking boundaries are? Something along the line
of what we have in arch/arm64/kvm/vgic/vgic.c, for example.
Thanks,
M.
--
Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists