Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> On Mon, May 11, 2020 at 06:47:46PM +0200, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
>> Currently, APF mechanism relies on the #PF abuse where the token is being
>> passed through CR2. If we switch to using interrupts to deliver page-ready
>> notifications we need a different way to pass the data. Extent the existing
>> 'struct kvm_vcpu_pv_apf_data' with token information for page-ready
>> notifications.
>>
>> The newly introduced apf_put_user_ready() temporary puts both reason
>> and token information, this will be changed to put token only when we
>> switch to interrupt based notifications.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/kvm_para.h | 3 ++-
>> arch/x86/kvm/x86.c | 17 +++++++++++++----
>> 2 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/kvm_para.h b/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/kvm_para.h
>> index 2a8e0b6b9805..e3602a1de136 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/kvm_para.h
>> +++ b/arch/x86/include/uapi/asm/kvm_para.h
>> @@ -113,7 +113,8 @@ struct kvm_mmu_op_release_pt {
>>
>> struct kvm_vcpu_pv_apf_data {
>> __u32 reason;
>> - __u8 pad[60];
>> + __u32 pageready_token;
>
> How about naming this just "token". That will allow me to deliver error
> as well. pageready_token name seems to imply that this will always be
> successful with page being ready.
>
> And reason will tell whether page could successfully be ready or
> it was an error. And token will help us identify the task which
> is waiting for the event.
I added 'pageready_' prefix to make it clear this is not used for 'page
not present' notifications where we pass token through CR2. (BTW
'reason' also becomes a misnomer because we can only see
'KVM_PV_REASON_PAGE_NOT_PRESENT' there.)
I have no strong opinion, can definitely rename this to 'token' and add
a line to the documentation to re-state that this is not used for type 1
events.
--
Vitaly
