On 06/10/2011 04:09 AM, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Tue, Jun 07, 2011 at 09:04:34PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote: >> Using rcu to protect shadow pages table to be freed, so we can safely walk it, >> it should run fast and is needed by mmio page fault > > A couple of question below. Thanks for your review! >> + if (atomic_read(&kvm->arch.reader_counter)) { > > This is the slowpath to be executed if there are currently readers > in kvm->arch.reader_counter(), correct? > Yes, we will free the pages in RCU context if it is in kvm->arch.reader_counter >> + free_mmu_pages_unlock_parts(invalid_list); >> + sp = list_first_entry(invalid_list, struct kvm_mmu_page, link); >> + list_del_init(invalid_list); >> + call_rcu(&sp->rcu, free_invalid_pages_rcu); >> + return; >> + } > > OK, so it also looks like kvm->arch.reader_counter could transition from > zero to non-zero at this point due to a concurrent call from a reader in > the kvm_mmu_walk_shadow_page_lockless() function. Does the following code > avoid messing up the reader? If so, why bother with the slowpath above? > Actually, we have split the free operation to two steps, the first step is kvm_mmu_prepare_zap_page(), it isolates the page from shadow page table, so after call it, we can not get the page from the shadow page table, and the later steps is kvm_mmu_commit_zap_page(), it frees the page. kvm_mmu_walk_shadow_page_lockless() get the page from shadow page table, so, even if kvm->arch.reader_counter transition from zero to non-zero in the fallowing code, we can sure the page is not used by kvm_mmu_walk_shadow_page_lockless(), so we can free the page directly. -- 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