From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.2 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24335C2D0A3 for ; Thu, 29 Oct 2020 20:47:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.xenproject.org (lists.xenproject.org [192.237.175.120]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A3D242076E for ; Thu, 29 Oct 2020 20:47:02 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org A3D242076E Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=xen.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org Received: from list by lists.xenproject.org with outflank-mailman.14737.36482 (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1kYEos-0002Tl-BF; Thu, 29 Oct 2020 20:46:50 +0000 X-Outflank-Mailman: Message body and most headers restored to incoming version Received: by outflank-mailman (output) from mailman id 14737.36482; Thu, 29 Oct 2020 20:46:50 +0000 X-BeenThere: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org List-Id: Xen developer discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org Precedence: list Sender: "Xen-devel" Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.xenproject.org) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1kYEos-0002Td-7u; Thu, 29 Oct 2020 20:46:50 +0000 Received: by outflank-mailman (input) for mailman id 14737; Thu, 29 Oct 2020 20:46:49 +0000 Received: from us1-rack-iad1.inumbo.com ([172.99.69.81]) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1kYEor-0002TX-0Q for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Thu, 29 Oct 2020 20:46:49 +0000 Received: from deinos.phlegethon.org (unknown [2001:41d0:8:b1d7::1]) by us1-rack-iad1.inumbo.com (Halon) with ESMTPS id 93f3cfd3-0c49-4615-969e-7806f7b833ab; Thu, 29 Oct 2020 20:46:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from tjd by deinos.phlegethon.org with local (Exim 4.92.3 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1kYEon-000LO7-M6; Thu, 29 Oct 2020 20:46:45 +0000 Received: from us1-rack-iad1.inumbo.com ([172.99.69.81]) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1kYEor-0002TX-0Q for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Thu, 29 Oct 2020 20:46:49 +0000 X-Inumbo-ID: 93f3cfd3-0c49-4615-969e-7806f7b833ab Received: from deinos.phlegethon.org (unknown [2001:41d0:8:b1d7::1]) by us1-rack-iad1.inumbo.com (Halon) with ESMTPS id 93f3cfd3-0c49-4615-969e-7806f7b833ab; Thu, 29 Oct 2020 20:46:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from tjd by deinos.phlegethon.org with local (Exim 4.92.3 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1kYEon-000LO7-M6; Thu, 29 Oct 2020 20:46:45 +0000 Date: Thu, 29 Oct 2020 20:46:45 +0000 From: Tim Deegan To: Jan Beulich Cc: "xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org" , Andrew Cooper , Wei Liu , Roger Pau =?iso-8859-1?Q?Monn=E9?= , George Dunlap Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] x86/p2m: split write_p2m_entry() hook Message-ID: <20201029204645.GD81685@deinos.phlegethon.org> References: <29d30de1-2a8d-aee2-d3c3-331758766fc9@suse.com> <7b2b7cc9-8828-41bd-7949-764161bbe7ff@suse.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <7b2b7cc9-8828-41bd-7949-764161bbe7ff@suse.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.11.1 (2018-12-01) X-SA-Known-Good: Yes X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: tim@xen.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on deinos.phlegethon.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false At 10:24 +0100 on 28 Oct (1603880693), Jan Beulich wrote: > Fair parts of the present handlers are identical; in fact > nestedp2m_write_p2m_entry() lacks a call to p2m_entry_modify(). Move > common parts right into write_p2m_entry(), splitting the hooks into a > "pre" one (needed just by shadow code) and a "post" one. > > For the common parts moved I think that the p2m_flush_nestedp2m() is, > at least from an abstract perspective, also applicable in the shadow > case. Hence it doesn't get a 3rd hook put in place. > > The initial comment that was in hap_write_p2m_entry() gets dropped: Its > placement was bogus, and looking back the the commit introducing it > (dd6de3ab9985 "Implement Nested-on-Nested") I can't see either what use > of a p2m it was meant to be associated with. > > Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich This seems like a good approach to me. I'm happy with the shadow parts but am not confident enough on nested p2m any more to have an opinion on that side. Acked-by: Tim Deegan