Date:   Fri, 31 Dec 2021 10:26:36 +0800
From:   Chao Peng <chao.p.peng@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
Cc:     kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
        qemu-devel@...gnu.org, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
        Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@...cent.com>,
        Jim Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>,
        Joerg Roedel <joro@...tes.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        x86@...nel.org, "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
        Jeff Layton <jlayton@...nel.org>,
        "J . Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Yu Zhang <yu.c.zhang@...ux.intel.com>,
        "Kirill A . Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
        luto@...nel.org, john.ji@...el.com, susie.li@...el.com,
        jun.nakajima@...el.com, dave.hansen@...el.com, ak@...ux.intel.com,
        david@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 kvm/queue 05/16] KVM: Maintain ofs_tree for fast
 memslot lookup by file offset

On Tue, Dec 28, 2021 at 09:48:08PM +0000, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 24, 2021, Chao Peng wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 23, 2021 at 06:02:33PM +0000, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > > On Thu, Dec 23, 2021, Chao Peng wrote:
> > > 
> > > In other words, there needs to be a 1:1 gfn:file+offset mapping.  Since userspace
> > > likely wants to allocate a single file for guest private memory and map it into
> > > multiple discontiguous slots, e.g. to skip the PCI hole, the best idea off the top
> > > of my head would be to register the notifier on a per-slot basis, not a per-VM
> > > basis.  It would require a 'struct kvm *' in 'struct kvm_memory_slot', but that's
> > > not a huge deal.
> > > 
> > > That way, KVM's notifier callback already knows the memslot and can compute overlap
> > > between the memslot and the range by reversing the math done by kvm_memfd_get_pfn().
> > > Then, armed with the gfn and slot, invalidation is just a matter of constructing
> > > a struct kvm_gfn_range and invoking kvm_unmap_gfn_range().
> > 
> > KVM is easy but the kernel bits would be difficulty, it has to maintain
> > fd+offset to memslot mapping because one fd can have multiple memslots,
> > it need decide which memslot needs to be notified.
> 
> No, the kernel side maintains an opaque pointer like it does today,

But the opaque pointer will now become memslot, isn't it? That said,
kernel side should maintain a list of opaque pointer (memslot) instead
of one for each fd (inode) since a fd to memslot mapping is 1:M now.

>KVM handles
> reverse engineering the memslot to get the offset and whatever else it needs.
> notify_fallocate() and other callbacks are unchanged, though they probably can
> drop the inode.
> 
> E.g. likely with bad math and handwaving on the overlap detection:
> 
> int kvm_private_fd_fallocate_range(void *owner, pgoff_t start, pgoff_t end)
> {
> 	struct kvm_memory_slot *slot = owner;
> 	struct kvm_gfn_range gfn_range = {
> 		.slot	   = slot,
> 		.start	   = (start - slot->private_offset) >> PAGE_SHIFT,
> 		.end	   = (end - slot->private_offset) >> PAGE_SHIFT,
> 		.may_block = true,
> 	};
> 
> 	if (!has_overlap(slot, start, end))
> 		return 0;
> 
> 	gfn_range.end = min(gfn_range.end, slot->base_gfn + slot->npages);
> 
> 	kvm_unmap_gfn_range(slot->kvm, &gfn_range);
> 	return 0;
> }

I understand this KVM side handling, but again one fd can have multiple
memslots. How shmem decides to notify which memslot from a list of
memslots when it invokes the notify_fallocate()? Or just notify all
the possible memslots then let KVM to check? 

Thanks,
Chao

Powered by blists - more mailing lists