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 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AC1A2C0015E for ; Wed, 9 Aug 2023 15:24:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qTl2l-00042X-Ti; Wed, 09 Aug 2023 11:24:15 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qTkkN-0004Em-Md for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 09 Aug 2023 11:05:15 -0400 Received: from mgamail.intel.com ([134.134.136.24]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qTkkL-000718-AI for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 09 Aug 2023 11:05:15 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1691593513; x=1723129513; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=g9pq6B+mSe9PyjCgvZrOnLjd8YP/EmJQp5wp/gLGkHw=; b=GiG17GWXfX3z0Pjy60Dwq5GEGr9Flki5Bzca6QeNhJ+IXWQQE71I9nUE xL5JMGYAGJaytMwdqoSfD3zO5/nnTiFnncNmhaSpXxyRq8rCfVmv8oA2H Ps1LxaLK9Mld1rYRePjV3dR2dSKMe9zLIUld1EE6vWZky14TvwdA3jvMR l4RuuN/GUsKhDFpCHAcILG2IVUe5MROpH9zxPTpDZIXZ7Gp4ClB8WUP3X cjkkFv+Ly3aFdNEYfTLoaQTH7K56/IkGPrrnVD5V8GZ7Cb/bbCWOvpYBE QPouLyBN9ZQZ+s86+nTxTJenzPgdq5kMyr3hK61vYtTtWnRnccW8cbohq Q==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,10797"; a="373927974" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.01,159,1684825200"; d="scan'208";a="373927974" Received: from orsmga004.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.38]) by orsmga102.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 09 Aug 2023 08:04:47 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,10797"; a="855568982" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.01,159,1684825200"; d="scan'208";a="855568982" Received: from yilunxu-optiplex-7050.sh.intel.com (HELO localhost) ([10.239.159.165]) by orsmga004.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 09 Aug 2023 08:04:41 -0700 Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2023 23:02:31 +0800 From: Xu Yilun To: Xiaoyao Li Cc: Paolo Bonzini , Sean Christopherson , David Hildenbrand , Igor Mammedov , "Michael S. Tsirkin" , Marcel Apfelbaum , Richard Henderson , Marcelo Tosatti , Markus Armbruster , Eric Blake , Daniel =?iso-8859-1?Q?P=2E_Berrang=E9?= , Philippe =?iso-8859-1?Q?Mathieu-Daud=E9?= , Peter Xu , Chao Peng , Michael Roth , isaku.yamahata@gmail.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 15/19] kvm: handle KVM_EXIT_MEMORY_FAULT Message-ID: References: <20230731162201.271114-1-xiaoyao.li@intel.com> <20230731162201.271114-16-xiaoyao.li@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20230731162201.271114-16-xiaoyao.li@intel.com> Received-SPF: pass client-ip=134.134.136.24; envelope-from=yilun.xu@intel.com; helo=mgamail.intel.com X-Spam_score_int: -43 X-Spam_score: -4.4 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.4 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 09 Aug 2023 11:24:14 -0400 X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org On 2023-07-31 at 12:21:57 -0400, Xiaoyao Li wrote: > From: Chao Peng > > Currently only KVM_MEMORY_EXIT_FLAG_PRIVATE in flags is valid when > KVM_EXIT_MEMORY_FAULT happens. It indicates userspace needs to do > the memory conversion on the RAMBlock to turn the memory into desired > attribute, i.e., private/shared. > > Note, KVM_EXIT_MEMORY_FAULT makes sense only when the RAMBlock has > gmem memory backend. > > Signed-off-by: Chao Peng > Signed-off-by: Xiaoyao Li > --- > accel/kvm/kvm-all.c | 52 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 52 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/accel/kvm/kvm-all.c b/accel/kvm/kvm-all.c > index f9b5050b8885..72d50b923bf2 100644 > --- a/accel/kvm/kvm-all.c > +++ b/accel/kvm/kvm-all.c > @@ -3040,6 +3040,48 @@ static void kvm_eat_signals(CPUState *cpu) > } while (sigismember(&chkset, SIG_IPI)); > } > > +static int kvm_convert_memory(hwaddr start, hwaddr size, bool to_private) > +{ > + MemoryRegionSection section; > + void *addr; > + RAMBlock *rb; > + ram_addr_t offset; > + int ret = -1; > + > + section = memory_region_find(get_system_memory(), start, size); > + if (!section.mr) { > + return ret; > + } > + > + if (memory_region_can_be_private(section.mr)) { > + if (to_private) { > + ret = kvm_set_memory_attributes_private(start, size); > + } else { > + ret = kvm_set_memory_attributes_shared(start, size); > + } > + > + if (ret) { > + return ret; Should we unref the memory region before return? Thanks, Yilun > + } > + > + addr = memory_region_get_ram_ptr(section.mr) + > + section.offset_within_region; > + rb = qemu_ram_block_from_host(addr, false, &offset); > + /* > + * With KVM_SET_MEMORY_ATTRIBUTES by kvm_set_memory_attributes(), > + * operation on underlying file descriptor is only for releasing > + * unnecessary pages. > + */ > + ram_block_convert_range(rb, offset, size, to_private); > + } else { > + warn_report("Convert non guest-memfd backed memory region (0x%"HWADDR_PRIx" ,+ 0x%"HWADDR_PRIx") to %s", > + start, size, to_private ? "private" : "shared"); > + } > + > + memory_region_unref(section.mr); > + return ret; > +}