Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 05/30/2010 03:37 PM, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
>> Using kvm_mmu_prepare_zap_page() and kvm_mmu_commit_zap_page() to
>> split kvm_mmu_zap_page() function, then we can:
>>
>> - traverse hlist safely
>> - easily to gather remote tlb flush which occurs during page zapped
>>
>>
>> +static int kvm_mmu_prepare_zap_page(struct kvm *kvm, struct
>> kvm_mmu_page *sp)
>> +{
>> + int ret;
>> +
>> + trace_kvm_mmu_zap_page(sp);
>> + ++kvm->stat.mmu_shadow_zapped;
>> + ret = mmu_zap_unsync_children(kvm, sp);
>> + kvm_mmu_page_unlink_children(kvm, sp);
>> + kvm_mmu_unlink_parents(kvm, sp);
>> + if (!sp->role.invalid&& !sp->role.direct)
>> + unaccount_shadowed(kvm, sp->gfn);
>> + if (sp->unsync)
>> + kvm_unlink_unsync_page(kvm, sp);
>> + if (!sp->root_count)
>> + /* Count self */
>> + ret++;
>> + else
>> + kvm_reload_remote_mmus(kvm);
>> +
>> + sp->role.invalid = 1;
>> + list_move(&sp->link,&kvm->arch.invalid_mmu_pages);
>> + kvm_mmu_reset_last_pte_updated(kvm);
>> + return ret;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static void kvm_mmu_commit_zap_page(struct kvm *kvm)
>> +{
>> + struct kvm_mmu_page *sp, *n;
>> +
>> + if (list_empty(&kvm->arch.invalid_mmu_pages))
>> + return;
>> +
>> + kvm_flush_remote_tlbs(kvm);
>> + list_for_each_entry_safe(sp, n,&kvm->arch.invalid_mmu_pages, link) {
>> + WARN_ON(!sp->role.invalid);
>> + if (!sp->root_count)
>> + kvm_mmu_free_page(kvm, sp);
>> + }
>> +}
>> +
>>
>
> You're adding two new functions but not using them here? Possibly in
> the old kvm_mmu_zap_page()?
I use those in the next patch, it's not in kvm_mmu_zap_page(), it's used like:
hold mmu spin lock
kvm_mmu_prepare_zap_page page A
kvm_mmu_prepare_zap_page page B
kvm_mmu_prepare_zap_page page C
......
kvm_mmu_commit_zap_page
release mmu spin lock
>
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
>> index 5e5cd8d..225c3c4 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
>> @@ -5331,6 +5331,7 @@ struct kvm *kvm_arch_create_vm(void)
>> }
>>
>> INIT_LIST_HEAD(&kvm->arch.active_mmu_pages);
>> + INIT_LIST_HEAD(&kvm->arch.invalid_mmu_pages);
>> INIT_LIST_HEAD(&kvm->arch.assigned_dev_head);
>>
>
> This is a good idea, but belongs in a separate patch? We can use it to
> reclaim invalid pages before allocating new ones.
>
This patch is very simple and kvm_mmu_commit_zap_page() function should depend on
kvm->arch.invalid_mmu_pages, so i think we on need separate this patch, your opinion? :-)
Thanks,
Xiao
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
