On Thu, Oct 27, 2022, Oliver Upton wrote: > The use of RCU is necessary to safely change the stage-2 page tables in > parallel. RCU isn't strictly necessary, it's simply _a_ way to ensure readers have gone away prior to freeing memory. E.g. another method (used on x86 at least), is to disable IRQs when walking page tables without holding mmu_lock, and then requiring paths that free page tables to effectively do an IPI shootdown of all CPUs that are reading page tables. And "safely change" is misleading. RCU doesn't allow safely _changing_ page tables; if RCU did, then patch 10 wouldn't need to implement atomic updates. Protecting page table walks with RCU is purely about ensuring readers have gone away prior to freeing the backing memory, an entirely different mechanism is needed to allow parallel updates, e.g. the CMPXCHG + KVM_INVALID_PTE_LOCKED approach to ensure only one walker "owns" the detached page table. _______________________________________________ kvmarm mailing list kvmarm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
