[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v5 1/2] x86/mem-sharing: Bulk mem-sharing entire domains
 
 
 
On Jun 14, 2016 10:33, "Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk" <konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: 
> 
> > diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/mm/mem_sharing.c b/xen/arch/x86/mm/mem_sharing.c 
> > index a522423..ba06fb0 100644 
> > --- a/xen/arch/x86/mm/mem_sharing.c 
> > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/mm/mem_sharing.c 
> > @@ -1294,6 +1294,54 @@ int relinquish_shared_pages(struct domain *d) 
> >      return rc; 
> >  } 
> > 
> > +static int bulk_share(struct domain *d, struct domain *cd, unsigned long limit, 
> > +                      struct mem_sharing_op_bulk *bulk) 
> > +{ 
> > +    int rc = 0; 
> > +    shr_handle_t sh, ch; 
> > + 
> > +    while( limit > bulk->start ) 
> 
> You are missing a space there. 
Ack. 
> > +    { 
> > +        /* 
> > +         * We only break out if we run out of memory as individual pages may 
> > +         * legitimately be unsharable and we just want to skip over those. 
> > +         */ 
> > +        rc = mem_sharing_nominate_page(d, bulk->start, 0, &sh); 
> > +        if ( rc == -ENOMEM ) 
> > +            break; 
> > +        if ( !rc ) 
> > +        { 
> > +            rc = mem_sharing_nominate_page(cd, bulk->start, 0, &ch); 
> > +            if ( rc == -ENOMEM ) 
> > +                break; 
> > +            if ( !rc ) 
> > +            { 
> > +                /* If we get here this should be guaranteed to succeed. */ 
> > +                rc = mem_sharing_share_pages(d, bulk->start, sh, 
> > +                                             cd, bulk->start, ch); 
> > +                ASSERT(!rc); 
> > +            } 
> > +        } 
> > + 
> > +        /* Check for continuation if it's not the last iteration. */ 
> > +        if ( limit > ++bulk->start && hypercall_preempt_check() ) 
> 
> I surprised the compiler didn't complain to you about lack of parenthesis. 
This seems to be standard way to create continuation used in multiple places throughout Xen. I don't personally like it much but I guess it's better to be consistent. 
> 
> > +        { 
> > +            rc = 1; 
> > +            break; 
> > +        } 
> > +    } 
> > + 
> > +    /* 
> > +     * We only propagate -ENOMEM as individual pages may fail with -EINVAL, 
> > +     * and for bulk sharing we only care if -ENOMEM was encountered so we reset 
> > +     * rc here. 
> > +     */ 
> > +    if ( rc < 0 && rc != -ENOMEM ) 
> > +        rc = 0; 
> > + 
> > +    return rc; 
> > +} 
> > + 
> >  int mem_sharing_memop(XEN_GUEST_HANDLE_PARAM(xen_mem_sharing_op_t) arg) 
> >  { 
> >      int rc; 
> > @@ -1468,6 +1516,79 @@ int mem_sharing_memop(XEN_GUEST_HANDLE_PARAM(xen_mem_sharing_op_t) arg) 
> >          } 
> >          break; 
> > 
> > +        case XENMEM_sharing_op_bulk_share: 
> > +        { 
> > +            unsigned long max_sgfn, max_cgfn; 
> > +            struct domain *cd; 
> > + 
> > +            rc = -EINVAL; 
> > +            if( mso.u.bulk._pad[0] || mso.u.bulk._pad[1] || mso.u.bulk._pad[2] ) 
> 
> The "if(".. 
Ack. 
Thanks, 
Tamas 
 
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
 
 
    
     |