On 2021/4/7 7:38, Sean Christopherson wrote: > On Tue, Apr 06, 2021, Keqian Zhu wrote: >> Hi Paolo, >> >> I'm just going to fix this issue, and found that you have done this ;-) > > Ha, and meanwhile I'm having a serious case of deja vu[1]. It even received a > variant of the magic "Queued, thanks"[2]. Doesn't appear in either of the 5.12 > pull requests though, must have gotten lost along the way. Good job. We should pick them up :) > > [1] https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20210213005015.1651772-3-seanjc@xxxxxxxxxx > [2] https://lkml.kernel.org/r/b5ab72f2-970f-64bd-891c-48f1c303548d@xxxxxxxxxx > >> Please feel free to add: >> >> Reviewed-by: Keqian Zhu <zhukeqian1@xxxxxxxxxx> >> >> Thanks, >> Keqian >> >> On 2021/4/2 20:17, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >>> When using manual protection of dirty pages, it is not necessary >>> to protect nested page tables down to the 4K level; instead KVM >>> can protect only hugepages in order to split them lazily, and >>> delay write protection at 4K-granularity until KVM_CLEAR_DIRTY_LOG. >>> This was overlooked in the TDP MMU, so do it there as well. >>> >>> Fixes: a6a0b05da9f37 ("kvm: x86/mmu: Support dirty logging for the TDP MMU") >>> Cc: Ben Gardon <bgardon@xxxxxxxxxx> >>> Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx> >>> --- >>> arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c | 2 +- >>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c >>> index efb41f31e80a..0d92a269c5fa 100644 >>> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c >>> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c >>> @@ -5538,7 +5538,7 @@ void kvm_mmu_slot_remove_write_access(struct kvm *kvm, >>> flush = slot_handle_level(kvm, memslot, slot_rmap_write_protect, >>> start_level, KVM_MAX_HUGEPAGE_LEVEL, false); >>> if (is_tdp_mmu_enabled(kvm)) >>> - flush |= kvm_tdp_mmu_wrprot_slot(kvm, memslot, PG_LEVEL_4K); >>> + flush |= kvm_tdp_mmu_wrprot_slot(kvm, memslot, start_level); >>> write_unlock(&kvm->mmu_lock); >>> >>> /* >>> > . >
