All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Xiao Guangrong <xiaoguangrong@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>
Cc: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	KVM <kvm@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 06/10] KVM: MMU: fast path of handling guest page fault
Date: Wed, 02 May 2012 13:28:39 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4FA0C607.5010002@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120501013459.GB10142@amt.cnet>

On 05/01/2012 09:34 AM, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:


> 
> It is getting better, but not yet, there are still reads of sptep
> scattered all over (as mentioned before, i think a pattern of read spte
> once, work on top of that, atomically write and then deal with results
> _everywhere_ (where mmu lock is held) is more consistent.
> 


But we only need care the path which depends on is_writable_pte(), no?

So, where call is_writable_pte() are spte_has_volatile_bits(),
spte_write_protect() and set_spte().

I have changed these functions:
In spte_has_volatile_bits():
 static bool spte_has_volatile_bits(u64 spte)
 {
+	/*
+	 * Always atomicly update spte if it can be updated
+	 * out of mmu-lock.
+	 */
+	if (spte_can_lockless_update(spte))
+		return true;
+

In spte_write_protect():

+	spte = mmu_spte_update(sptep, spte);
+
+	if (is_writable_pte(spte))
+		*flush |= true;
+
The 'spte' is from atomically read-write (xchg).

in set_spte():
 set_pte:
-	mmu_spte_update(sptep, spte);
+	entry = mmu_spte_update(sptep, spte);
 	/*
 	 * If we overwrite a writable spte with a read-only one we
 	 * should flush remote TLBs. Otherwise rmap_write_protect
The 'entry' is also the latest value.

>         /*
>          * If we overwrite a writable spte with a read-only one we
>          * should flush remote TLBs. Otherwise rmap_write_protect
>          * will find a read-only spte, even though the writable spte
>          * might be cached on a CPU's TLB.
>          */
>         if (is_writable_pte(entry) && !is_writable_pte(*sptep))
>                 kvm_flush_remote_tlbs(vcpu->kvm);
> 
> This is inconsistent with the above obviously.
> 


'entry' is not a problem since it is from atomically read-write as
mentioned above, i need change this code to:

		/*
		 * Optimization: for pte sync, if spte was writable the hash
		 * lookup is unnecessary (and expensive). Write protection
		 * is responsibility of mmu_get_page / kvm_sync_page.
		 * Same reasoning can be applied to dirty page accounting.
		 */
		if (!can_unsync && is_writable_pte(entry) /* Use 'entry' instead of '*sptep'. */
			goto set_pte
   ......


         if (is_writable_pte(entry) && !is_writable_pte(spte)) /* Use 'spte' instead of '*sptep'. */
                 kvm_flush_remote_tlbs(vcpu->kvm);


  reply	other threads:[~2012-05-02  5:28 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-04-25  4:00 [PATCH v4 00/10] KVM: MMU: fast page fault Xiao Guangrong
2012-04-25  4:01 ` [PATCH v4 01/10] KVM: MMU: return bool in __rmap_write_protect Xiao Guangrong
2012-04-25  4:01 ` [PATCH v4 02/10] KVM: MMU: abstract spte write-protect Xiao Guangrong
2012-04-25  4:02 ` [PATCH v4 03/10] KVM: VMX: export PFEC.P bit on ept Xiao Guangrong
2012-04-25  4:02 ` [PATCH v4 04/10] KVM: MMU: introduce SPTE_MMU_WRITEABLE bit Xiao Guangrong
2012-04-25  4:03 ` [PATCH v4 05/10] KVM: MMU: introduce SPTE_WRITE_PROTECT bit Xiao Guangrong
2012-04-25  4:03 ` [PATCH v4 06/10] KVM: MMU: fast path of handling guest page fault Xiao Guangrong
2012-04-26 23:45   ` Marcelo Tosatti
2012-04-27  5:53     ` Xiao Guangrong
2012-04-27 14:52       ` Marcelo Tosatti
2012-04-28  6:10         ` Xiao Guangrong
2012-05-01  1:34           ` Marcelo Tosatti
2012-05-02  5:28             ` Xiao Guangrong [this message]
2012-05-02 21:07               ` Marcelo Tosatti
2012-05-03 11:26                 ` Xiao Guangrong
2012-05-05 14:08                   ` Marcelo Tosatti
2012-05-06  9:36                     ` Avi Kivity
2012-05-07  6:52                     ` Xiao Guangrong
2012-04-29  8:50         ` Takuya Yoshikawa
2012-05-01  2:31           ` Marcelo Tosatti
2012-05-02  5:39           ` Xiao Guangrong
2012-05-02 21:10             ` Marcelo Tosatti
2012-05-03 12:09               ` Xiao Guangrong
2012-05-03 12:13                 ` Avi Kivity
2012-05-03  0:15             ` Takuya Yoshikawa
2012-05-03 12:23               ` Xiao Guangrong
2012-05-03 12:40                 ` Takuya Yoshikawa
2012-04-25  4:04 ` [PATCH v4 07/10] KVM: MMU: lockless update spte on fast page fault path Xiao Guangrong
2012-04-25  4:04 ` [PATCH v4 08/10] KVM: MMU: trace fast page fault Xiao Guangrong
2012-04-25  4:05 ` [PATCH v4 09/10] KVM: MMU: fix kvm_mmu_pagetable_walk tracepoint Xiao Guangrong
2012-04-25  4:06 ` [PATCH v4 10/10] KVM: MMU: document mmu-lock and fast page fault Xiao Guangrong

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=4FA0C607.5010002@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --to=xiaoguangrong@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=avi@redhat.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mtosatti@redhat.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.