On Tue, Feb 25, 2025, Yan Zhao wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 24, 2025 at 03:55:39PM -0800, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > Don't load (and then put) a vCPU when unloading its MMU during VM
> > destruction, as nothing in kvm_mmu_unload() accesses vCPU state beyond the
> > root page/address of each MMU, i.e. can't possible need to run with the
> > vCPU loaded.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > arch/x86/kvm/x86.c | 9 +--------
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 8 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> > index 045c61cc7e54..9978ed4c0917 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> > @@ -12767,13 +12767,6 @@ int kvm_arch_init_vm(struct kvm *kvm, unsigned long type)
> > return ret;
> > }
> >
> > -static void kvm_unload_vcpu_mmu(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> > -{
> > - vcpu_load(vcpu);
> > - kvm_mmu_unload(vcpu);
> > - vcpu_put(vcpu);
> > -}
> > -
> > static void kvm_unload_vcpu_mmus(struct kvm *kvm)
> > {
> > unsigned long i;
> > @@ -12781,7 +12774,7 @@ static void kvm_unload_vcpu_mmus(struct kvm *kvm)
> >
> > kvm_for_each_vcpu(i, vcpu, kvm) {
> > kvm_clear_async_pf_completion_queue(vcpu);
> > - kvm_unload_vcpu_mmu(vcpu);
> > + kvm_mmu_unload(vcpu);
> What about just dropping kvm_unload_vcpu_mmu() here?
> kvm_mmu_unload() will be invoked again in kvm_mmu_destroy().
>
> kvm_arch_vcpu_destroy() --> kvm_mmu_destroy() --> kvm_mmu_unload().
Ugh, I missed that there's yet another call to kvm_mmu_unload(). I definitely
agree with dropping the first kvm_mmu_load(), but I'll do it in a follow-up patch
so that all three changes are isolated (not doing the load/put, doing unload as
part of vCPU destruction, doing unload only once at the end).
And looking at both calls to kvm_mmu_unload(), I suspect that grabbing kvm->srcu
around kvm_mmu_destroy() is unnecessary. I'll try cleaning that up as well.
