On 05/23/2013 02:18 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 02:13:06PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
>> On 05/23/2013 01:57 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
>>> On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 03:55:58AM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
>>>> It is only used to zap the obsolete page. Since the obsolete page
>>>> will not be used, we need not spend time to find its unsync children
>>>> out. Also, we delete the page from shadow page cache so that the page
>>>> is completely isolated after call this function.
>>>>
>>>> The later patch will use it to collapse tlb flushes
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Xiao Guangrong <xiaoguangrong@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>> ---
>>>> arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c | 46 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
>>>> 1 files changed, 41 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c
>>>> index 9b57faa..e676356 100644
>>>> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c
>>>> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c
>>>> @@ -1466,7 +1466,7 @@ static inline void kvm_mod_used_mmu_pages(struct kvm *kvm, int nr)
>>>> static void kvm_mmu_free_page(struct kvm_mmu_page *sp)
>>>> {
>>>> ASSERT(is_empty_shadow_page(sp->spt));
>>>> - hlist_del(&sp->hash_link);
>>>> + hlist_del_init(&sp->hash_link);
>>> Why do you need hlist_del_init() here? Why not move it into
>>
>> Since the hlist will be double freed. We will it like this:
>>
>> kvm_mmu_prepare_zap_obsolete_page(page, list);
>> kvm_mmu_commit_zap_page(list);
>> kvm_mmu_free_page(page);
>>
>> The first place is kvm_mmu_prepare_zap_obsolete_page(page), which have
>> deleted the hash list.
>>
>>> kvm_mmu_prepare_zap_page() like we discussed it here:
>>> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/2580351/ instead of doing
>>> it differently for obsolete and non obsolete pages?
>>
>> It is can break the hash-list walking: we should rescan the
>> hash list once the page is prepared-ly zapped.
>>
>> I mentioned it in the changelog:
>>
>> 4): drop the patch which deleted page from hash list at the "prepare"
>> time since it can break the walk based on hash list.
> Can you elaborate on how this can happen?
There is a example:
int kvm_mmu_unprotect_page(struct kvm *kvm, gfn_t gfn)
{
struct kvm_mmu_page *sp;
LIST_HEAD(invalid_list);
int r;
pgprintk("%s: looking for gfn %llx\n", __func__, gfn);
r = 0;
spin_lock(&kvm->mmu_lock);
for_each_gfn_indirect_valid_sp(kvm, sp, gfn) {
pgprintk("%s: gfn %llx role %x\n", __func__, gfn,
sp->role.word);
r = 1;
kvm_mmu_prepare_zap_page(kvm, sp, &invalid_list);
}
kvm_mmu_commit_zap_page(kvm, &invalid_list);
spin_unlock(&kvm->mmu_lock);
return r;
}
It works fine since kvm_mmu_prepare_zap_page does not touch the hash list.
If we delete hlist in kvm_mmu_prepare_zap_page(), this kind of codes should
be changed to:
restart:
for_each_gfn_indirect_valid_sp(kvm, sp, gfn) {
pgprintk("%s: gfn %llx role %x\n", __func__, gfn,
sp->role.word);
r = 1;
if (kvm_mmu_prepare_zap_page(kvm, sp, &invalid_list))
goto restart;
}
kvm_mmu_commit_zap_page(kvm, &invalid_list);
--
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
