On Tue, Jan 12, 2021, Ben Gardon wrote:
Currently the TDP MMU yield / cond_resched functions either return
nothing or return true if the TLBs were not flushed. These are confusing
semantics, especially when making control flow decisions in calling
functions.
To clean things up, change both functions to have the same
return value semantics as cond_resched: true if the thread yielded,
false if it did not. If the function yielded in the _flush_ version,
then the TLBs will have been flushed.
Reviewed-by: Peter Feiner <pfeiner@xxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Ben Gardon <bgardon@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.c | 38 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------
1 file changed, 29 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.c b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.c
index 2ef8615f9dba..b2784514ca2d 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/tdp_mmu.c
@@ -413,8 +413,15 @@ static inline void tdp_mmu_set_spte_no_dirty_log(struct kvm *kvm,
_mmu->shadow_root_level, _start, _end)
/*
- * Flush the TLB if the process should drop kvm->mmu_lock.
- * Return whether the caller still needs to flush the tlb.
+ * Flush the TLB and yield if the MMU lock is contended or this thread needs to
+ * return control to the scheduler.
+ *
+ * If this function yields, it will also reset the tdp_iter's walk over the
+ * paging structure and the calling function should allow the iterator to
+ * continue its traversal from the paging structure root.
+ *
+ * Return true if this function yielded, the TLBs were flushed, and the
+ * iterator's traversal was reset. Return false if a yield was not needed.
*/
static bool tdp_mmu_iter_flush_cond_resched(struct kvm *kvm, struct tdp_iter *iter)
{
@@ -422,18 +429,30 @@ static bool tdp_mmu_iter_flush_cond_resched(struct kvm *kvm, struct tdp_iter *it
kvm_flush_remote_tlbs(kvm);
cond_resched_lock(&kvm->mmu_lock);
tdp_iter_refresh_walk(iter);
- return false;
- } else {
return true;
- }
+ } else
+ return false;
Kernel style is to have curly braces on all branches if any branch has 'em. Or,
omit the else since the taken branch always returns. I think I prefer the latter?
}
-static void tdp_mmu_iter_cond_resched(struct kvm *kvm, struct tdp_iter *iter)
+/*
+ * Yield if the MMU lock is contended or this thread needs to return control
+ * to the scheduler.
+ *
+ * If this function yields, it will also reset the tdp_iter's walk over the
+ * paging structure and the calling function should allow the iterator to
+ * continue its traversal from the paging structure root.
+ *
+ * Return true if this function yielded and the iterator's traversal was reset.
+ * Return false if a yield was not needed.
+ */
+static bool tdp_mmu_iter_cond_resched(struct kvm *kvm, struct tdp_iter *iter)
{
if (need_resched() || spin_needbreak(&kvm->mmu_lock)) {
cond_resched_lock(&kvm->mmu_lock);
tdp_iter_refresh_walk(iter);
- }
+ return true;
+ } else
+ return false;
Same here.
}
/*
@@ -470,7 +489,8 @@ static bool zap_gfn_range(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_mmu_page *root,
tdp_mmu_set_spte(kvm, &iter, 0);
if (can_yield)
- flush_needed = tdp_mmu_iter_flush_cond_resched(kvm, &iter);
+ flush_needed = !tdp_mmu_iter_flush_cond_resched(kvm,
+ &iter);
As with the existing code, I'd let this poke out. Alternatively, this could be
written as:
flush_needed = !can_yield ||
!tdp_mmu_iter_flush_cond_resched(kvm, &iter);
else
flush_needed = true;
}
@@ -1072,7 +1092,7 @@ static void zap_collapsible_spte_range(struct kvm *kvm,
tdp_mmu_set_spte(kvm, &iter, 0);
- spte_set = tdp_mmu_iter_flush_cond_resched(kvm, &iter);
+ spte_set = !tdp_mmu_iter_flush_cond_resched(kvm, &iter);
}
if (spte_set)
--
2.30.0.284.gd98b1dd5eaa7-goog
