Re: [PATCH v4 02/15] KVM: async_pf: Add helper function to check completion queue

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

 



Hi Eric,

On 11/10/21 11:37 PM, Eric Auger wrote:
On 8/15/21 2:59 AM, Gavin Shan wrote:
This adds inline helper kvm_check_async_pf_completion_queue() to
check if there are pending completion in the queue. The empty stub
is also added on !CONFIG_KVM_ASYNC_PF so that the caller needn't
consider if CONFIG_KVM_ASYNC_PF is enabled.

All checks on the completion queue is done by the newly added inline
function since list_empty() and list_empty_careful() are interchangeable.
why is it interchangeable?


I think the commit log is misleading. list_empty_careful() is more strict
than list_empty(). In this patch, we replace list_empty() with list_empty_careful().
I will correct the commit log in next respin like below:

   All checks on the completion queue is done by the newly added inline
   function where list_empty_careful() instead of list_empty() is used.

Signed-off-by: Gavin Shan <gshan@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
  arch/x86/kvm/x86.c       |  2 +-
  include/linux/kvm_host.h | 10 ++++++++++
  virt/kvm/async_pf.c      | 10 +++++-----
  virt/kvm/kvm_main.c      |  4 +---
  4 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
index e5d5c5ed7dd4..7f35d9324b99 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
@@ -11591,7 +11591,7 @@ static inline bool kvm_guest_apic_has_interrupt(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
static inline bool kvm_vcpu_has_events(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
  {
-	if (!list_empty_careful(&vcpu->async_pf.done))
+	if (kvm_check_async_pf_completion_queue(vcpu))
  		return true;
if (kvm_apic_has_events(vcpu))
diff --git a/include/linux/kvm_host.h b/include/linux/kvm_host.h
index 85b61a456f1c..a5f990f6dc35 100644
--- a/include/linux/kvm_host.h
+++ b/include/linux/kvm_host.h
@@ -339,12 +339,22 @@ struct kvm_async_pf {
  	bool				notpresent_injected;
  };
+static inline bool kvm_check_async_pf_completion_queue(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
+{
+	return !list_empty_careful(&vcpu->async_pf.done);
+}
+
  void kvm_clear_async_pf_completion_queue(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
  void kvm_check_async_pf_completion(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
  bool kvm_setup_async_pf(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, gpa_t cr2_or_gpa,
  			unsigned long hva, struct kvm_arch_async_pf *arch);
  int kvm_async_pf_wakeup_all(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu);
  #else
+static inline bool kvm_check_async_pf_completion_queue(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
+{
+	return false;
+}
+
  static inline void kvm_check_async_pf_completion(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu) { }
  #endif
diff --git a/virt/kvm/async_pf.c b/virt/kvm/async_pf.c
index dd777688d14a..d145a61a046a 100644
--- a/virt/kvm/async_pf.c
+++ b/virt/kvm/async_pf.c
@@ -70,7 +70,7 @@ static void async_pf_execute(struct work_struct *work)
  		kvm_arch_async_page_present(vcpu, apf);
spin_lock(&vcpu->async_pf.lock);
-	first = list_empty(&vcpu->async_pf.done);
+	first = !kvm_check_async_pf_completion_queue(vcpu);
  	list_add_tail(&apf->link, &vcpu->async_pf.done);
  	apf->vcpu = NULL;
  	spin_unlock(&vcpu->async_pf.lock);
@@ -122,7 +122,7 @@ void kvm_clear_async_pf_completion_queue(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
  		spin_lock(&vcpu->async_pf.lock);
  	}
- while (!list_empty(&vcpu->async_pf.done)) {
+	while (kvm_check_async_pf_completion_queue(vcpu)) {
this is replaced by a stronger check. Please can you explain why is it
equivalent?

Access to the completion queue is protected by spinlock. So the additional
check in list_empty_careful() to verify the head's prev/next are modified
on the fly shouldn't happen. It means they're same in our case.

  		struct kvm_async_pf *work =
  			list_first_entry(&vcpu->async_pf.done,
  					 typeof(*work), link);
@@ -138,7 +138,7 @@ void kvm_check_async_pf_completion(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
  {
  	struct kvm_async_pf *work;
- while (!list_empty_careful(&vcpu->async_pf.done) &&
+	while (kvm_check_async_pf_completion_queue(vcpu) &&
  	      kvm_arch_can_dequeue_async_page_present(vcpu)) {
  		spin_lock(&vcpu->async_pf.lock);
  		work = list_first_entry(&vcpu->async_pf.done, typeof(*work),
@@ -205,7 +205,7 @@ int kvm_async_pf_wakeup_all(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
  	struct kvm_async_pf *work;
  	bool first;
- if (!list_empty_careful(&vcpu->async_pf.done))
+	if (kvm_check_async_pf_completion_queue(vcpu))
  		return 0;
work = kmem_cache_zalloc(async_pf_cache, GFP_ATOMIC);
@@ -216,7 +216,7 @@ int kvm_async_pf_wakeup_all(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
  	INIT_LIST_HEAD(&work->queue); /* for list_del to work */
spin_lock(&vcpu->async_pf.lock);
-	first = list_empty(&vcpu->async_pf.done);
+	first = !kvm_check_async_pf_completion_queue(vcpu);
  	list_add_tail(&work->link, &vcpu->async_pf.done);
  	spin_unlock(&vcpu->async_pf.lock);
diff --git a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
index b50dbe269f4b..8795503651b1 100644
--- a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
+++ b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
@@ -3282,10 +3282,8 @@ static bool vcpu_dy_runnable(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
  	if (kvm_arch_dy_runnable(vcpu))
  		return true;
-#ifdef CONFIG_KVM_ASYNC_PF
-	if (!list_empty_careful(&vcpu->async_pf.done))
+	if (kvm_check_async_pf_completion_queue(vcpu))
  		return true;
-#endif
return false;
  }


Thanks,
Gavin




[Index of Archives]     [KVM ARM]     [KVM ia64]     [KVM ppc]     [Virtualization Tools]     [Spice Development]     [Libvirt]     [Libvirt Users]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Questions]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]

  Powered by Linux