[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aW8yuEX486oJ+zOp@yzhao56-desk.sh.intel.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2026 15:46:00 +0800
From: Yan Zhao <yan.y.zhao@...el.com>
To: "Huang, Kai" <kai.huang@...el.com>
CC: "binbin.wu@...ux.intel.com" <binbin.wu@...ux.intel.com>, "Edgecombe, Rick
P" <rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com>, "kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-coco@...ts.linux.dev" <linux-coco@...ts.linux.dev>, "Li, Xiaoyao"
<xiaoyao.li@...el.com>, "Hansen, Dave" <dave.hansen@...el.com>, "Wu, Binbin"
<binbin.wu@...el.com>, "kas@...nel.org" <kas@...nel.org>, "seanjc@...gle.com"
<seanjc@...gle.com>, "mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
"pbonzini@...hat.com" <pbonzini@...hat.com>, "tglx@...utronix.de"
<tglx@...utronix.de>, "Yamahata, Isaku" <isaku.yamahata@...el.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "Annapurve,
Vishal" <vannapurve@...gle.com>, "bp@...en8.de" <bp@...en8.de>, "Gao, Chao"
<chao.gao@...el.com>, "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 12/16] x86/virt/tdx: Add helpers to allow for
pre-allocating pages
On Tue, Jan 20, 2026 at 03:10:59PM +0800, Huang, Kai wrote:
> On Thu, 2025-11-27 at 10:38 +0800, Binbin Wu wrote:
> >
> > On 11/27/2025 6:33 AM, Edgecombe, Rick P wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > static int tdx_topup_external_fault_cache(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, unsigned int cnt)
> > > > > {
> > > > > - struct vcpu_tdx *tdx = to_tdx(vcpu);
> > > > > + struct tdx_prealloc *prealloc = &to_tdx(vcpu)->prealloc;
> > > > > + int min_fault_cache_size;
> > > > >
> > > > > - return kvm_mmu_topup_memory_cache(&tdx->mmu_external_spt_cache, cnt);
> > > > > + /* External page tables */
> > > > > + min_fault_cache_size = cnt;
> > > > > + /* Dynamic PAMT pages (if enabled) */
> > > > > + min_fault_cache_size += tdx_dpamt_entry_pages() * PT64_ROOT_MAX_LEVEL;
> > > > Is the value PT64_ROOT_MAX_LEVEL intended, since dynamic PAMT pages are only
> > > > needed for 4KB level?
> > > I'm not sure I follow. We need DPAMT backing for each S-EPT page table.
> > Oh, right!
> >
> > IIUIC, PT64_ROOT_MAX_LEVEL is actually
> > - PT64_ROOT_MAX_LEVEL - 1 for S-ETP pages since root page is not needed.
> > - 1 for TD private memory page
> >
> > It's better to add a comment about it.
> >
>
> But theoretically we don't need a pair of DPAMT pages for one 4K S-EPT
> page -- we only need a pair for a entire 2M range. If these S-EPT pages
> in the fault path are allocated from the same 2M range, we are actually
> over allocating DPAMT pages.
topup() always ensures that the min page count in cache is the max count of
pages a fault needs.
For example, mmu_topup_memory_caches() ensures there are at least
PT64_ROOT_MAX_LEVEL pages in mmu_page_header_cache, which are not always
consumed by each fault.
But in the worst-case conditions, we actually need that many.
In the end, the unused pages in cache will be freed by mmu_free_memory_caches().
> And AFAICT unfortunately there's no way to resolve this, unless we use
So, I don't think it's a problem.
And I agree with Binbin :)
> tdx_alloc_page() for S-EPT pages.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists