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=-6.7 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED, DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no 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 C986BC433DF for ; Thu, 6 Aug 2020 16:57:41 +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 1AE402086A for ; Thu, 6 Aug 2020 16:57:42 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="oGVOb19D" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 1AE402086A Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.xenproject.org) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1k3jCk-0002hB-06; Thu, 06 Aug 2020 16:57:22 +0000 Received: from us1-rack-iad1.inumbo.com ([172.99.69.81]) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1k3jCi-0002gf-JV for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Thu, 06 Aug 2020 16:57:20 +0000 X-Inumbo-ID: 5de44ed9-0a5b-4eff-9dbb-453693d2fb70 Received: from mail-lj1-x242.google.com (unknown [2a00:1450:4864:20::242]) by us1-rack-iad1.inumbo.com (Halon) with ESMTPS id 5de44ed9-0a5b-4eff-9dbb-453693d2fb70; Thu, 06 Aug 2020 16:57:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-lj1-x242.google.com with SMTP id z14so14982439ljm.1 for ; Thu, 06 Aug 2020 09:57:19 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:content-language; bh=4qV6lUrNuALPJYj9m7qEjE220AEOLRVX5YbSyC4XAio=; b=oGVOb19DcQKszsJ6FntN0KTnw/p+sNSZLaNbgmitgAJrNaL0oSanHoyvL2V2tLT/1j F5//KIg4mn5D41FQqZWMuusG2ME0UuoSiJK87XX6QgDtI/CZQy73j2M8dVGwye0bMLdA 6tUWAbA4JTZr1jxz+b7UblA0q7eiPOKegk7bydaAyNupadMljXYBI7C/vTZr2NEbAhEe DB3SyD26XSwP7nAwx1fTKNY3CDgtam/Y+LOmWqtSdCZc/gGQycbzgzeDLoMHGrgRX7r6 l7H49Qeqzqkh1bMDUHhLzQqRI86C5DB7OBrw+FC3cYKyCq/CFxrzPwHfJoSoUCD6JXWu pZXA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding :content-language; bh=4qV6lUrNuALPJYj9m7qEjE220AEOLRVX5YbSyC4XAio=; b=Lc8WV48F/iwNfsimQgUqUFqOF1+l7TicDzZAMgnSp9Q2q66V0T82uVrG3ZR2R5h2Yz O1ae/vO9cQ9HlLR+hzIW2VHpjwVAffUKeImAY67ZVF0lXwZwl+lT9z3wa4Mi8fpuMCWR x25U+1dwq5DQLLCL2a9gYZOXLTgHivznvEL7T7CMHb+MuVNqAcf9K8CHXgHokNgdX0OE E1dRxQw9LhvqcVr5w2Gm1LVU/QkEiQxDnx5IXusTvwHJ7bUuyfQJJ8jo/eIoWAUxVqMd 1CMMud/4pQ+fYGtEO9gLVmkGxyEiVGUlYq1jn7mwjCw/RV0W/PdhKRZ7VLyFmiZ1Z6+N hNsQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530ODQ3OJ3DNwSjOXcfAb04uR15yHt2zvEmGbkl85aTupXRCdjoy uh63YiM/j4b4LC34SLHZaJw= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzXJz2noTKioWXqsb7e/poKnbAn+qTf4RRcrgnXbvrgBF5Rxiv4+O3HGjveFX6IE24dpBOmWQ== X-Received: by 2002:a2e:a316:: with SMTP id l22mr2262606lje.301.1596733038503; Thu, 06 Aug 2020 09:57:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.2] ([212.22.223.21]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id w19sm2668465ljd.112.2020.08.06.09.57.17 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 06 Aug 2020 09:57:18 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH V1 08/12] xen/arm: Invalidate qemu mapcache on XENMEM_decrease_reservation To: Jan Beulich References: <1596478888-23030-1-git-send-email-olekstysh@gmail.com> <1596478888-23030-9-git-send-email-olekstysh@gmail.com> <21b7d8ed-f305-8abe-0e4e-174d72d087c8@suse.com> <04cfd6e4-1ed0-52c3-a3b0-d555d9dc632b@suse.com> <0ff0807f-c5d3-f63c-d54c-860648ef3a13@gmail.com> <52549e1a-d29b-d2c5-8173-e44dbd67d04f@suse.com> From: Oleksandr Message-ID: <343fa576-0575-c7cc-1097-6a463c3662dd@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2020 19:57:12 +0300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <52549e1a-d29b-d2c5-8173-e44dbd67d04f@suse.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Language: en-US X-BeenThere: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Xen developer discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Stefano Stabellini , Julien Grall , Wei Liu , Andrew Cooper , Ian Jackson , George Dunlap , Oleksandr Tyshchenko , xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, Volodymyr Babchuk Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org Sender: "Xen-devel" On 06.08.20 19:33, Jan Beulich wrote: Hi Jan. > On 06.08.2020 16:28, Oleksandr wrote: >> On 06.08.20 14:50, Jan Beulich wrote: >> >> Hi Jan >> >>>>> On 03.08.2020 20:21, Oleksandr Tyshchenko wrote: >>>>>> --- a/xen/common/memory.c >>>>>> +++ b/xen/common/memory.c >>>>>> @@ -1652,6 +1652,12 @@ long do_memory_op(unsigned long cmd, XEN_GUEST_HANDLE_PARAM(void) arg) >>>>>> break; >>>>>> } >>>>>> >>>>>> + /* x86 already sets the flag in hvm_memory_op() */ >>>>>> +#if defined(CONFIG_ARM64) && defined(CONFIG_IOREQ_SERVER) >>>>>> + if ( op == XENMEM_decrease_reservation ) >>>>>> + curr_d->arch.hvm.qemu_mapcache_invalidate = true; >>>>>> +#endif >>>>> Doesn't the comment already indicate a route towards an approach >>>>> not requiring to alter common code? >>>> Given that IOREQ is now moved under common/, I think it would make sense >>>> to have this set in common code as well for all the architecture. >>>> >>>> IOW, I would suggest to drop the #ifdef CONFIG_ARM64. In addition, we >>>> may want to introduce an helper to check if a domain is using ioreq. >>> Of course, with the (part of the) conditional dropped and the struct >>> field moved out of the arch sub-struct, this is fine to live here. >> ok. >> >> >> I suspect this should *also* live in compat_memory_op(). Please confirm >> whether my understanding correct. > Doesn't compat_memory_op() simply call here, so will have the flag set > as needed? Indeed, sorry for the noise. -- Regards, Oleksandr Tyshchenko