On Sun, Jun 09, 2013 at 05:06:24PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote: > On 06/09/2013 04:53 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote: > > On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 08:36:19AM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote: > >> Hi Gleb, Paolo, Marcelo, > >> > >> I have putted the potential controversial patches to the latter that are > >> patch 8 ~ 10, patch 11 depends on patch 9. Other patches are fully reviewed, > >> I think its are ready for being merged. If not luck enough, further discussion > >> is needed, could you please apply that patches first? :) > >> > >> Thank you in advance! > >> > >> Some points are raised during discussion but missed in this version: > >> 1) Gleb's idea that skip obsolete pages in the hast list walker > >> > >> Unfortunately, it is not safe. There has a window between updating > >> valid-gen and reloading mmu, in that window, the obsolete page can > >> be used by vcpu, but the guest page table fail to be write-protected > >> (since the obsolete page is skipped in mmu_need_write_protect()). > >> > > Can you elaborate on how this can happen. valid_gen is updated under > > mmu_lock and reloading of mmus happens under the same lock, so for all > > other vcpus this should look like atomic thing. > > You're right. > > Actually, i made another optimization patch in this version that moves > kvm_reload_remote_mmus() out of mmu-lock, but did not attach it into this > series. It seems my brain is not parallel-able enough. :( Yours is the most parallel-able I ever saw :) -- Gleb. -- 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
