linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 9/9] KVM: X86: Optimize zapping rmap

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 28 Jul 2021 21:39:02 +0000
From:   Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
To:     Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        Maxim Levitsky <mlevitsk@...hat.com>,
        Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 9/9] KVM: X86: Optimize zapping rmap

On Fri, Jun 25, 2021, Peter Xu wrote:
> Using rmap_get_first() and rmap_remove() for zapping a huge rmap list could be
> slow.  The easy way is to travers the rmap list, collecting the a/d bits and
> free the slots along the way.
> 
> Provide a pte_list_destroy() and do exactly that.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>
> ---
>  arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c | 45 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------
>  1 file changed, 33 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c
> index ba0258bdebc4..45aac78dcabc 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c
> @@ -1014,6 +1014,38 @@ unsigned int pte_list_count(struct kvm_rmap_head *rmap_head)
>  	return count;
>  }
>  
> +/* Return true if rmap existed and callback called, false otherwise */
> +static bool pte_list_destroy(struct kvm_rmap_head *rmap_head,
> +			     int (*callback)(u64 *sptep))
> +{
> +	struct pte_list_desc *desc, *next;
> +	int i;
> +
> +	if (!rmap_head->val)
> +		return false;
> +
> +	if (!(rmap_head->val & 1)) {
> +		if (callback)
> +			callback((u64 *)rmap_head->val);
> +		goto out;
> +	}
> +
> +	desc = (struct pte_list_desc *)(rmap_head->val & ~1ul);
> +
> +	while (desc) {
> +		if (callback)
> +			for (i = 0; i < desc->spte_count; i++)
> +				callback(desc->sptes[i]);
> +		next = desc->more;
> +		mmu_free_pte_list_desc(desc);
> +		desc = next;

Alternatively, 

	desc = (struct pte_list_desc *)(rmap_head->val & ~1ul);
	for ( ; desc; desc = next) {
		for (i = 0; i < desc->spte_count; i++)
			mmu_spte_clear_track_bits((u64 *)rmap_head->val);
		next = desc->more;
		mmu_free_pte_list_desc(desc);
	}

> +	}
> +out:
> +	/* rmap_head is meaningless now, remember to reset it */
> +	rmap_head->val = 0;
> +	return true;

Why implement this as a generic method with a callback?  gcc is suprisingly
astute in optimizing callback(), but I don't see the point of adding a complex
helper that has a single caller, and is extremely unlikely to gain new callers.
Or is there another "zap everything" case I'm missing?

E.g. why not this?

static bool kvm_zap_rmapp(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_rmap_head *rmap_head,
			  const struct kvm_memory_slot *slot)
{
	struct pte_list_desc *desc, *next;
	int i;

	if (!rmap_head->val)
		return false;

	if (!(rmap_head->val & 1)) {
		mmu_spte_clear_track_bits((u64 *)rmap_head->val);
		goto out;
	}

	desc = (struct pte_list_desc *)(rmap_head->val & ~1ul);
	for ( ; desc; desc = next) {
		for (i = 0; i < desc->spte_count; i++)
			mmu_spte_clear_track_bits(desc->sptes[i]);
		next = desc->more;
		mmu_free_pte_list_desc(desc);
	}
out:
	/* rmap_head is meaningless now, remember to reset it */
	rmap_head->val = 0;
	return true;
}

> +}
> +
>  static struct kvm_rmap_head *__gfn_to_rmap(gfn_t gfn, int level,
>  					   struct kvm_memory_slot *slot)
>  {
> @@ -1403,18 +1435,7 @@ static bool rmap_write_protect(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 gfn)
>  static bool kvm_zap_rmapp(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_rmap_head *rmap_head,
>  			  struct kvm_memory_slot *slot)
>  {
> -	u64 *sptep;
> -	struct rmap_iterator iter;
> -	bool flush = false;
> -
> -	while ((sptep = rmap_get_first(rmap_head, &iter))) {
> -		rmap_printk("spte %p %llx.\n", sptep, *sptep);
> -
> -		pte_list_remove(rmap_head, sptep);
> -		flush = true;
> -	}
> -
> -	return flush;
> +	return pte_list_destroy(rmap_head, mmu_spte_clear_track_bits);
>  }
>  
>  static bool kvm_unmap_rmapp(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_rmap_head *rmap_head,
> -- 
> 2.31.1
>