On 31/03/22 5:58 am, Sean Christopherson wrote:
This whole series needs to be Cc'd to the arm64 and s390 folks. The easiest way
to that is to use scripts/get_maintainers.pl, which will grab the appropriate
people. There are a variety of options you can use to tailor it to your style.
E.g. for KVM I do
--nogit --nogit-fallback --norolestats --nofixes --pattern-depth=1
for To:, and then add
--nom
for Cc:. The --pattern-depth=1 tells it to not recurse up so that it doesn't
include the x86 maintainers for arch/x86/kvm patches.
I'd Cc them manually, but I think it'll be easier to just post v4.
Thanks. I'm waiting for some reviews on the selftests (the third patch
of this series). As
soon as I receive some, I'll send v4.
On Sun, Mar 06, 2022, Shivam Kumar wrote:
diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
index eb4029660bd9..0b35b8cc0274 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
@@ -10257,6 +10257,10 @@ static int vcpu_run(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
vcpu->arch.l1tf_flush_l1d = true;
for (;;) {
+ r = kvm_vcpu_check_dirty_quota(vcpu);
+ if (!r)
+ break;
+
if (kvm_vcpu_running(vcpu)) {
r = vcpu_enter_guest(vcpu);
} else {
diff --git a/include/linux/kvm_host.h b/include/linux/kvm_host.h
index f11039944c08..b1c599c78c42 100644
--- a/include/linux/kvm_host.h
+++ b/include/linux/kvm_host.h
@@ -530,6 +530,21 @@ static inline int kvm_vcpu_exiting_guest_mode(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
return cmpxchg(&vcpu->mode, IN_GUEST_MODE, EXITING_GUEST_MODE);
}
+static inline int kvm_vcpu_check_dirty_quota(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
+{
+ u64 dirty_quota = READ_ONCE(vcpu->run->dirty_quota);
+ u64 pages_dirtied = vcpu->stat.generic.pages_dirtied;
+ struct kvm_run *run = vcpu->run;
Might as well use "run" when reading the dirty quota.
Sure. Thanks.
+
+ if (!dirty_quota || (pages_dirtied < dirty_quota))
+ return 1;
I don't love returning 0/1 from a function that suggests it returns a bool, but
I do agree it's better than actually returning a bool. I also don't have a better
name, so I'm just whining in the hope that Paolo or someone else has an idea :-)
I've seen plenty of check functions returning 0/1 but please do let me
know if there's
a convention to use a bool in such scenarios. I'm also looking for a
better name but
this one also looks good enough to me.
+ run->exit_reason = KVM_EXIT_DIRTY_QUOTA_EXHAUSTED;
+ run->dirty_quota_exit.count = pages_dirtied;
+ run->dirty_quota_exit.quota = dirty_quota;
+ return 0;
+}
