From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: David Vrabel <david.vrabel@citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv5 1/2] x86/ept: invalidate guest physical
 mappings on VMENTER
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2015 10:18:12 +0000
Message-ID: <5673DD64.90500@citrix.com>
References: <1450365426-23167-1-git-send-email-david.vrabel@citrix.com>
	<1450365426-23167-2-git-send-email-david.vrabel@citrix.com>
	<AADFC41AFE54684AB9EE6CBC0274A5D15F74E124@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
Received: from mail6.bemta3.messagelabs.com ([195.245.230.39])
	by lists.xen.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72)
	(envelope-from <prvs=787c6add4=david.vrabel@citrix.com>)
	id 1a9s77-0002q5-7S
	for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Fri, 18 Dec 2015 10:18:17 +0000
In-Reply-To: <AADFC41AFE54684AB9EE6CBC0274A5D15F74E124@SHSMSX101.ccr.corp.intel.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@intel.com>, "xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org" <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>
Cc: George Dunlap <george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com>, Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>, Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>, "Nakajima, Jun" <jun.nakajima@intel.com>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On 18/12/15 07:53, Tian, Kevin wrote:
>> From: David Vrabel [mailto:david.vrabel@citrix.com]
>> Sent: Thursday, December 17, 2015 11:17 PM
> 
> [...]
> 
>> diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/vmx/vmx.c b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/vmx/vmx.c
>> index f7c5e4f..cca35f2 100644
>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/hvm/vmx/vmx.c
>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/hvm/vmx/vmx.c
> 
> [...]
> 
>> @@ -3507,6 +3495,16 @@ void vmx_vmenter_helper(const struct cpu_user_regs *regs)
>>      if ( unlikely(need_flush) )
>>          vpid_sync_all();
>>
>> +    if ( paging_mode_hap(curr->domain) )
>> +    {
>> +        struct ept_data *ept = &p2m_get_hostp2m(curr->domain)->ept;
>> +        unsigned int cpu = smp_processor_id();
>> +
>> +        if ( cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, ept->invalidate)
>> +             && cpumask_test_and_clear_cpu(cpu, ept->invalidate) )
> 
> Just test_and_clear should be enough.

The first test is to avoid the locked test and clear in the common case.
 But this is probably better written as

  if ( cpumask_test_cpu(cpu, ept->invalidate) )
  {
      cpumask_clear_cpu(cpu, ept->invalidate);
      __invept(...);
   }

>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/mm/p2m-ept.c
>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/mm/p2m-ept.c
>> @@ -1089,9 +1089,10 @@ static void ept_memory_type_changed(struct p2m_domain
>> *p2m)
>>
>>  static void __ept_sync_domain(void *info)
>>  {
>> -    struct ept_data *ept = &((struct p2m_domain *)info)->ept;
>> -
>> -    __invept(INVEPT_SINGLE_CONTEXT, ept_get_eptp(ept), 0);
>> +    /*
>> +     * The invalidate will be done before VMENTER (see
> 
> invalidate -> invalidation?

That would be the correct English grammer, yes.

David