[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <0ebf26d1ee540b4e082b65c51cabe3327f6d51ac.camel@intel.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2022 09:14:24 +0000
From: "Huang, Kai" <kai.huang@...el.com>
To: "kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
CC: "Hansen, Dave" <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
"Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>,
"bagasdotme@...il.com" <bagasdotme@...il.com>,
"ak@...ux.intel.com" <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
"Wysocki, Rafael J" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
"kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
"Christopherson,, Sean" <seanjc@...gle.com>,
"Chatre, Reinette" <reinette.chatre@...el.com>,
"pbonzini@...hat.com" <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
"Yamahata, Isaku" <isaku.yamahata@...el.com>,
"peterz@...radead.org" <peterz@...radead.org>,
"Shahar, Sagi" <sagis@...gle.com>,
"imammedo@...hat.com" <imammedo@...hat.com>,
"Gao, Chao" <chao.gao@...el.com>,
"Brown, Len" <len.brown@...el.com>,
"sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com"
<sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com>,
"Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com>,
"Williams, Dan J" <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 14/20] x86/virt/tdx: Set up reserved areas for all
TDMRs
On Wed, 2022-11-23 at 15:39 -0800, Dave Hansen wrote:
> > +static int tdmr_set_up_memory_hole_rsvd_areas(struct tdmr_info *tdmr,
> > + int *rsvd_idx)
> > +{
>
> This needs a comment.
>
> This is another case where it's confusing to be passing around 'struct
> tdmr_info *'. Is this *A* TDMR or an array?
It is for one TDMR but not an array. All functions in form of tdmr_xxx() are
operations for one TDMR.
But I agree it's not clear.
>
> /*
> * Go through tdx_memlist to find holes between memory areas. If any of
> * those holes fall within @tdmr, set up a TDMR reserved area to cover
> * the hole.
> */
> static int tdmr_populate_rsvd_holes(struct list_head *tdx_memlist,
> struct tdmr_info *tdmr,
> int *rsvd_idx)
Thanks!
Should I also change below function 'tdmr_set_up_pamt_rsvd_areas()' to, i.e.
tdmr_populate_rsvd_pamts()?
Actually, there are two more functions in this patch: tdmr_set_up_rsvd_areas()
and tdmrs_set_up_rsvd_areas_all(). Should I also change them to
tdmr_populate_rsvd_areas() and tdmrs_populate_rsvd_areas_all()?
>
> > + struct tdx_memblock *tmb;
> > + u64 prev_end;
> > + int ret;
> > +
> > + /* Mark holes between memory regions as reserved */
> > + prev_end = tdmr_start(tdmr);
>
> I'm having a hard time following this, especially the mixing of
> semantics between 'prev_end' both pointing to tdmr and to tmb addresses.
>
> Here, 'prev_end' logically represents the last address which we know has
> been handled. All of the holes in the addresses below it have been
> dealt with. It is safe to set here to tdmr_start() because this
> function call is uniquely tasked with setting up reserved areas in
> 'tdmr'. So, it can safely consider any holes before tdmr_start(tdmr) as
> being handled.
Yes.
>
> But, dang, there's a lot of complexity there.
>
> First, the:
>
> /* Mark holes between memory regions as reserved */
>
> comment is misleading. It has *ZILCH* to do with the "prev_end =
> tdmr_start(tdmr);" assignment.
>
> This at least needs:
>
> /* Start looking for reserved blocks at the beginning of the TDMR: */
> prev_end = tdmr_start(tdmr);
Right. Sorry for the bad comment.
>
> but I also get the feeling that 'prev_end' is a crummy variable name. I
> don't have any better suggestions at the moment.
>
> > + list_for_each_entry(tmb, &tdx_memlist, list) {
> > + u64 start, end;
> > +
> > + start = tmb->start_pfn << PAGE_SHIFT;
> > + end = tmb->end_pfn << PAGE_SHIFT;
> > +
>
> More alignment opportunities:
>
> start = tmb->start_pfn << PAGE_SHIFT;
> end = tmb->end_pfn << PAGE_SHIFT;
Should I use PFN_PHYS()? Then looks we don't need this alignment.
>
>
> > + /* Break if this region is after the TDMR */
> > + if (start >= tdmr_end(tdmr))
> > + break;
> > +
> > + /* Exclude regions before this TDMR */
> > + if (end < tdmr_start(tdmr))
> > + continue;
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * Skip if no hole exists before this region. "<=" is
> > + * used because one memory region might span two TDMRs
> > + * (when the previous TDMR covers part of this region).
> > + * In this case the start address of this region is
> > + * smaller than the start address of the second TDMR.
> > + *
> > + * Update the prev_end to the end of this region where
> > + * the possible memory hole starts.
> > + */
>
> Can't this just be:
>
> /*
> * Skip over memory areas that
> * have already been dealt with.
> */
I think so. This actually also covers the "two contiguous memory regions" case,
which isn't mentioned in the original comment.
>
> > + if (start <= prev_end) {
> > + prev_end = end;
> > + continue;
> > + }
> > +
> > + /* Add the hole before this region */
> > + ret = tdmr_add_rsvd_area(tdmr, rsvd_idx, prev_end,
> > + start - prev_end);
> > + if (ret)
> > + return ret;
> > +
> > + prev_end = end;
> > + }
> > +
> > + /* Add the hole after the last region if it exists. */
> > + if (prev_end < tdmr_end(tdmr)) {
> > + ret = tdmr_add_rsvd_area(tdmr, rsvd_idx, prev_end,
> > + tdmr_end(tdmr) - prev_end);
> > + if (ret)
> > + return ret;
> > + }
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int tdmr_set_up_pamt_rsvd_areas(struct tdmr_info *tdmr, int
> > *rsvd_idx,
> > + struct tdmr_info *tdmr_array,
> > + int tdmr_num)
> > +{
> > + int i, ret;
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * If any PAMT overlaps with this TDMR, the overlapping part
> > + * must also be put to the reserved area too. Walk over all
> > + * TDMRs to find out those overlapping PAMTs and put them to
> > + * reserved areas.
> > + */
> > + for (i = 0; i < tdmr_num; i++) {
> > + struct tdmr_info *tmp = tdmr_array_entry(tdmr_array, i);
> > + unsigned long pamt_start_pfn, pamt_npages;
> > + u64 pamt_start, pamt_end;
> > +
> > + tdmr_get_pamt(tmp, &pamt_start_pfn, &pamt_npages);
> > + /* Each TDMR must already have PAMT allocated */
> > + WARN_ON_ONCE(!pamt_npages || !pamt_start_pfn);
> > +
> > + pamt_start = pamt_start_pfn << PAGE_SHIFT;
> > + pamt_end = pamt_start + (pamt_npages << PAGE_SHIFT);
> > +
> > + /* Skip PAMTs outside of the given TDMR */
> > + if ((pamt_end <= tdmr_start(tdmr)) ||
> > + (pamt_start >= tdmr_end(tdmr)))
> > + continue;
> > +
> > + /* Only mark the part within the TDMR as reserved */
> > + if (pamt_start < tdmr_start(tdmr))
> > + pamt_start = tdmr_start(tdmr);
> > + if (pamt_end > tdmr_end(tdmr))
> > + pamt_end = tdmr_end(tdmr);
> > +
> > + ret = tdmr_add_rsvd_area(tdmr, rsvd_idx, pamt_start,
> > + pamt_end - pamt_start);
> > + if (ret)
> > + return ret;
> > + }
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > +/* Compare function called by sort() for TDMR reserved areas */
> > +static int rsvd_area_cmp_func(const void *a, const void *b)
> > +{
> > + struct tdmr_reserved_area *r1 = (struct tdmr_reserved_area *)a;
> > + struct tdmr_reserved_area *r2 = (struct tdmr_reserved_area *)b;
> > +
> > + if (r1->offset + r1->size <= r2->offset)
> > + return -1;
> > + if (r1->offset >= r2->offset + r2->size)
> > + return 1;
> > +
> > + /* Reserved areas cannot overlap. The caller should guarantee. */
> > + WARN_ON_ONCE(1);
> > + return -1;
> > +}
> > +
> > +/* Set up reserved areas for a TDMR, including memory holes and PAMTs */
> > +static int tdmr_set_up_rsvd_areas(struct tdmr_info *tdmr,
> > + struct tdmr_info *tdmr_array,
> > + int tdmr_num)
> > +{
> > + int ret, rsvd_idx = 0;
> > +
> > + /* Put all memory holes within the TDMR into reserved areas */
> > + ret = tdmr_set_up_memory_hole_rsvd_areas(tdmr, &rsvd_idx);
> > + if (ret)
> > + return ret;
> > +
> > + /* Put all (overlapping) PAMTs within the TDMR into reserved areas
> > */
> > + ret = tdmr_set_up_pamt_rsvd_areas(tdmr, &rsvd_idx, tdmr_array,
> > tdmr_num);
> > + if (ret)
> > + return ret;
> > +
> > + /* TDX requires reserved areas listed in address ascending order */
> > + sort(tdmr->reserved_areas, rsvd_idx, sizeof(struct
> > tdmr_reserved_area),
> > + rsvd_area_cmp_func, NULL);
>
> Ugh, and I guess we don't know where the PAMTs will be ordered with
> respect to holes, so sorting is the easiest way to do this.
>
> <snip>
Right.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists