Re: [PATCH 2/2] KVM: arm64: Try PMD block mappings if PUD mappings are not supported

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 2020-09-08 13:23, Alexandru Elisei wrote:
Hi Marc,

On 9/4/20 10:58 AM, Marc Zyngier wrote:
Hi Alex,

On Tue, 01 Sep 2020 14:33:57 +0100,
Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@xxxxxxx> wrote:
When userspace uses hugetlbfs for the VM memory, user_mem_abort() tries to use the same block size to map the faulting IPA in stage 2. If stage 2 cannot use the same size mapping because the block size doesn't fit in the memslot or the memslot is not properly aligned, user_mem_abort() will fall back to a page mapping, regardless of the block size. We can do better for PUD backed hugetlbfs by checking if a PMD block mapping is possible before
deciding to use a page.

vma_pagesize is an unsigned long, use 1UL instead of 1ULL when assigning
its value.

Signed-off-by: Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@xxxxxxx>
---
 arch/arm64/kvm/mmu.c | 19 ++++++++++++++-----
 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/mmu.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/mmu.c
index 25e7dc52c086..f590f7355cda 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/kvm/mmu.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/mmu.c
@@ -1871,15 +1871,24 @@ static int user_mem_abort(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, phys_addr_t fault_ipa,
 	else
 		vma_shift = PAGE_SHIFT;

-	vma_pagesize = 1ULL << vma_shift;
 	if (logging_active ||
-	    (vma->vm_flags & VM_PFNMAP) ||
- !fault_supports_stage2_huge_mapping(memslot, hva, vma_pagesize)) {
+	    (vma->vm_flags & VM_PFNMAP)) {
 		force_pte = true;
-		vma_pagesize = PAGE_SIZE;
 		vma_shift = PAGE_SHIFT;
 	}

+	if (vma_shift == PUD_SHIFT &&
+	    !fault_supports_stage2_huge_mapping(memslot, hva, PUD_SIZE))
+		vma_shift = PMD_SHIFT;
+
+	if (vma_shift == PMD_SHIFT &&
+	    !fault_supports_stage2_huge_mapping(memslot, hva, PMD_SIZE)) {
+		force_pte = true;
+		vma_shift = PAGE_SHIFT;
+	}
+
+	vma_pagesize = 1UL << vma_shift;
+
 	/*
 	 * The stage2 has a minimum of 2 level table (For arm64 see
 	 * kvm_arm_setup_stage2()). Hence, we are guaranteed that we can
@@ -1889,7 +1898,7 @@ static int user_mem_abort(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, phys_addr_t fault_ipa,
 	 */
 	if (vma_pagesize == PMD_SIZE ||
 	    (vma_pagesize == PUD_SIZE && kvm_stage2_has_pmd(kvm)))
-		gfn = (fault_ipa & huge_page_mask(hstate_vma(vma))) >> PAGE_SHIFT;
+		gfn = (fault_ipa & ~(vma_pagesize - 1)) >> PAGE_SHIFT;
 	mmap_read_unlock(current->mm);

 	/* We need minimum second+third level pages */
Although this looks like a sensible change, I'm a reluctant to take it
at this stage, given that we already have a bunch of patches from Will
to change the way we deal with PTs.

Could you look into how this could fit into the new code instead?

Sure, that sounds very sensible. I'm in the process of reviewing Will's series,
and after I'm done I'll rebase this on top of his patches and send it
as v2. Does
that sound ok to you? Or do you want me to base this patch on one of
your branches?

Either way is fine (kvmarm/next has his patches). Just let me know
what this is based on when you  post the patches.

        M.
--
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm



[Index of Archives]     [Linux KVM]     [Spice Development]     [Libvirt]     [Libvirt Users]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux