[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH]: Fix Xen domU boot with batched mprotect
Jan Beulich wrote: Chris Lalancette <clalance@xxxxxxxxxx> 15.10.08 13:03 >>>The right thing to do is to use arbitrary_virt_to_machine, so that we can be sure we are modifying the right pfn. This unfortunately introduces a performance penalty because of a full page-table-walk, but we can avoid that penalty for pages in the p2m list by checking if virt_addr_valid is true, and if so, just doing the lookup in the p2m table.Could you explain how virt_addr_valid() can validly be used here? Looking at its implementation #define virt_addr_valid(kaddr) pfn_valid(__pa(kaddr) >> PAGE_SHIFT) a kaddr in kmap space (i.e. above high_memory) would return a bogus physical address, and hence pfn_valid() on the resulting pfn is meaningless. virt_addr_valid() is supposed to be usable in this circumstace. The comment says "virt_to_page(kaddr) returns a valid pointer if and only if virt_addr_valid(kaddr) returns true", which implies that virt_addr_valid() returns a meaningful result on all addresses - and if not, it should be fixed. I'd instead simply compare the address in question against high_memory, and perhaps instead of in arbitrary_virt_to_machine() in ptep_modify_prot_commit() under an #ifdef CONFIG_HIGHPTE. I suppose, but I don't think there's much cost in making it generally robust. But performance-wise, CONFIG_HIGHPTE sucks under Xen anyway, so you'd better not turn this on in the first place. We may want/need to provide a means to disable this at run time so the same kernel when run natively could still make use of it, but without impacting performance under Xen. That's a secondary issue. What's the source of the performance hit? Just all the extra kmap_atomic operations? J _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |