On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 03:01:19PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 12/22/2010 01:12 PM, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> >On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 01:07:23PM +0200, Avi Kivity wrote:
> >> On 12/22/2010 01:01 PM, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> >> >If a pagetable contains a writeable large spte, all of its sptes will be
> >>
> >> non-writeable
> >>
> >> >write protected, including non-leaf ones, leading to endless pagefaults.
> >> >
> >> >Do not write protect pages above PT_PAGE_TABLE_LEVEL, as the spte fault
> >> >paths assume non-leaf sptes are writable.
> >> >
> >> >Signed-off-by: Marcelo Tosatti<mtosatti@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >> >
> >> >diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c
> >> >index c3853d5..c716ff8 100644
> >> >--- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c
> >> >+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c
> >> >@@ -3442,6 +3442,9 @@ void kvm_mmu_slot_remove_write_access(struct kvm *kvm, int slot)
> >> > if (!test_bit(slot, sp->slot_bitmap))
> >> > continue;
> >> >
> >> >+ if (sp->role.level != PT_PAGE_TABLE_LEVEL)
> >> >+ continue;
> >> >+
> >> > pt = sp->spt;
> >> > for (i = 0; i< PT64_ENT_PER_PAGE; ++i)
> >> > /* avoid RMW */
> >>
> >> But what about large leaf sptes? Don't we want to write protect, or
> >> perhaps drop them?
> >>
> >> I think write-protecting leaf sptes and ignoring nonleaf sptes should work.
> >
> >When dirty logging is enabled large sptes are nuked and creation of new
> >ones is not allowed. So i don't see the need?
>
> Where does this nuking happen?
>
> All I see is the call to kvm_mmu_slot_remove_write_access().
set_memory_region:
/* destroy any largepage mappings for dirty tracking */
if (old.npages)
flush_shadow = 1;
--
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
