[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20231204144334.910-19-paul@xen.org>
Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2023 14:43:33 +0000
From: Paul Durrant <paul@....org>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, x86@...nel.org,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
Paul Durrant <paul@....org>, Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH v10 18/19] KVM: pfncache: check the need for invalidation under read lock first
From: Paul Durrant <pdurrant@...zon.com>
Taking a write lock on a pfncache will be disruptive if the cache is
heavily used (which only requires a read lock). Hence, in the MMU notifier
callback, take read locks on caches to check for a match; only taking a
write lock to actually perform an invalidation (after a another check).
Signed-off-by: Paul Durrant <pdurrant@...zon.com>
---
Cc: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@...gle.com>
Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
Cc: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
v10:
- New in this version.
---
virt/kvm/pfncache.c | 22 +++++++++++++++++++---
1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/virt/kvm/pfncache.c b/virt/kvm/pfncache.c
index c2a2d1e145b6..4da16d494f4b 100644
--- a/virt/kvm/pfncache.c
+++ b/virt/kvm/pfncache.c
@@ -29,14 +29,30 @@ void gfn_to_pfn_cache_invalidate_start(struct kvm *kvm, unsigned long start,
spin_lock(&kvm->gpc_lock);
list_for_each_entry(gpc, &kvm->gpc_list, list) {
- write_lock_irq(&gpc->lock);
+ read_lock_irq(&gpc->lock);
/* Only a single page so no need to care about length */
if (gpc->valid && !is_error_noslot_pfn(gpc->pfn) &&
gpc->uhva >= start && gpc->uhva < end) {
- gpc->valid = false;
+ read_unlock_irq(&gpc->lock);
+
+ /*
+ * There is a small window here where the cache could
+ * be modified, and invalidation would no longer be
+ * necessary. Hence check again whether invalidation
+ * is still necessary once the write lock has been
+ * acquired.
+ */
+
+ write_lock_irq(&gpc->lock);
+ if (gpc->valid && !is_error_noslot_pfn(gpc->pfn) &&
+ gpc->uhva >= start && gpc->uhva < end)
+ gpc->valid = false;
+ write_unlock_irq(&gpc->lock);
+ continue;
}
- write_unlock_irq(&gpc->lock);
+
+ read_unlock_irq(&gpc->lock);
}
spin_unlock(&kvm->gpc_lock);
}
--
2.39.2
Powered by blists - more mailing lists