|
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 15/30] xen/x86: populate PVHv2 Dom0 physical memory map
>>> On 27.09.16 at 17:57, <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> @@ -43,6 +44,11 @@ static long __initdata dom0_nrpages;
> static long __initdata dom0_min_nrpages;
> static long __initdata dom0_max_nrpages = LONG_MAX;
>
> +/* Size of the VM86 TSS for virtual 8086 mode to use. */
> +#define HVM_VM86_TSS_SIZE 128
> +
> +static unsigned int __initdata hvm_mem_stats[MAX_ORDER + 1];
This is for your debugging only I suppose?
> @@ -336,7 +343,8 @@ static unsigned long __init compute_dom0_nr_pages(
> avail -= dom0_paging_pages(d, nr_pages);
> }
>
> - if ( (parms->p2m_base == UNSET_ADDR) && (dom0_nrpages <= 0) &&
> + if ( is_pv_domain(d) &&
> + (parms->p2m_base == UNSET_ADDR) && (dom0_nrpages <= 0) &&
Perhaps better to simply force parms->p2m_base to UNSET_ADDR
earlier on?
> @@ -579,8 +588,19 @@ static __init void pvh_setup_e820(struct domain *d,
> unsigned long nr_pages)
> continue;
> }
>
> - *entry_guest = *entry;
> - pages = PFN_UP(entry_guest->size);
> + /*
> + * Make sure the start and length are aligned to PAGE_SIZE, because
> + * that's the minimum granularity of the 2nd stage translation.
> + */
> + start = ROUNDUP(entry->addr, PAGE_SIZE);
> + end = (entry->addr + entry->size) & PAGE_MASK;
> + if ( start >= end )
> + continue;
> +
> + entry_guest->type = E820_RAM;
> + entry_guest->addr = start;
> + entry_guest->size = end - start;
> + pages = PFN_DOWN(entry_guest->size);
> if ( (cur_pages + pages) > nr_pages )
> {
> /* Truncate region */
> @@ -591,6 +611,8 @@ static __init void pvh_setup_e820(struct domain *d,
> unsigned long nr_pages)
> {
> cur_pages += pages;
> }
> + ASSERT(IS_ALIGNED(entry_guest->addr, PAGE_SIZE) &&
> + IS_ALIGNED(entry_guest->size, PAGE_SIZE));
What does this guard against? Your addition arranges for things to
be page aligned, and the only adjustment done until we get here is
one that obviously also doesn't violate that requirement. I'm all for
assertions when they check state which is not obviously right, but
here I don't see the need.
> @@ -1657,15 +1679,238 @@ out:
> return rc;
> }
>
> +/* Populate an HVM memory range using the biggest possible order. */
> +static void __init hvm_populate_memory_range(struct domain *d, uint64_t
> start,
> + uint64_t size)
> +{
> + static unsigned int __initdata memflags = MEMF_no_dma|MEMF_exact_node;
> + unsigned int order;
> + struct page_info *page;
> + int rc;
> +
> + ASSERT(IS_ALIGNED(size, PAGE_SIZE) && IS_ALIGNED(start, PAGE_SIZE));
> +
> + order = MAX_ORDER;
> + while ( size != 0 )
> + {
> + order = min(get_order_from_bytes_floor(size), order);
> + page = alloc_domheap_pages(d, order, memflags);
> + if ( page == NULL )
> + {
> + if ( order == 0 && memflags )
> + {
> + /* Try again without any memflags. */
> + memflags = 0;
> + order = MAX_ORDER;
> + continue;
> + }
> + if ( order == 0 )
> + panic("Unable to allocate memory with order 0!\n");
> + order--;
> + continue;
> + }
Is it not possible to utilize alloc_chunk() here?
> + hvm_mem_stats[order]++;
> + rc = guest_physmap_add_page(d, _gfn(PFN_DOWN(start)),
> + _mfn(page_to_mfn(page)), order);
> + if ( rc != 0 )
> + panic("Failed to populate memory: [%" PRIx64 " - %" PRIx64 "]
> %d\n",
[<start>,<end>) please.
> + start, start + (((uint64_t)1) << (order + PAGE_SHIFT)),
> rc);
> + start += ((uint64_t)1) << (order + PAGE_SHIFT);
> + size -= ((uint64_t)1) << (order + PAGE_SHIFT);
Please prefer 1ULL over (uint64_t)1.
> + if ( (size & 0xffffffff) == 0 )
> + process_pending_softirqs();
That's 4Gb at a time - isn't that a little too much?
> + }
> +
> +}
Stray blank line.
> +static int __init hvm_setup_vmx_unrestricted_guest(struct domain *d)
> +{
> + struct e820entry *entry;
> + p2m_type_t p2mt;
> + uint32_t rc, *ident_pt;
> + uint8_t *tss;
> + mfn_t mfn;
> + paddr_t gaddr = 0;
> + int i;
unsigned int
> + /*
> + * Stole some space from the last found RAM region. One page will be
Steal
> + * used for the identify page tables, and the remaining space for the
identity
> + * VM86 TSS. Note that after this not all e820 regions will be aligned
> + * to PAGE_SIZE.
> + */
> + for ( i = 1; i <= d->arch.nr_e820; i++ )
> + {
> + entry = &d->arch.e820[d->arch.nr_e820 - i];
> + if ( entry->type != E820_RAM ||
> + entry->size < PAGE_SIZE + HVM_VM86_TSS_SIZE )
> + continue;
> +
> + entry->size -= PAGE_SIZE + HVM_VM86_TSS_SIZE;
> + gaddr = entry->addr + entry->size;
> + break;
> + }
> +
> + if ( gaddr == 0 || gaddr < MB(1) )
> + {
> + printk("Unable to find memory to stash the identity map and TSS\n");
> + return -ENOMEM;
One function up you panic() on error - please be consistent. Also for
one of the other patches I think we figured that the TSS isn't really
required, so please only warn in that case.
> + }
> +
> + /*
> + * Identity-map page table is required for running with CR0.PG=0
> + * when using Intel EPT. Create a 32-bit non-PAE page directory of
> + * superpages.
> + */
> + tss = map_domain_gfn(p2m_get_hostp2m(d), _gfn(PFN_DOWN(gaddr)),
> + &mfn, &p2mt, 0, &rc);
Comment and operation don't really fit together.
> +static int __init hvm_setup_p2m(struct domain *d)
> +{
> + struct vcpu *saved_current, *v = d->vcpu[0];
> + unsigned long nr_pages;
> + int i, rc, preempted;
> +
> + printk("** Preparing memory map **\n");
Debugging leftover again?
> + /*
> + * Subtract one page for the EPT identity page table and two pages
> + * for the MADT replacement.
> + */
> + nr_pages = compute_dom0_nr_pages(d, NULL, 0) - 3;
How do you know the MADT replacement requires two pages? Isn't
that CPU-count dependent? And doesn't the partial page used for
the TSS also need accounting for here?
> + hvm_setup_e820(d, nr_pages);
> + do {
> + preempted = 0;
> + paging_set_allocation(d, dom0_paging_pages(d, nr_pages),
> + &preempted);
> + process_pending_softirqs();
> + } while ( preempted );
> +
> + /*
> + * Special treatment for memory < 1MB:
> + * - Copy the data in e820 regions marked as RAM (BDA, EBDA...).
> + * - Map everything else as 1:1.
> + * NB: all this only makes sense if booted from legacy BIOSes.
> + */
> + rc = modify_mmio_11(d, 0, PFN_DOWN(MB(1)), true);
> + if ( rc )
> + {
> + printk("Failed to map low 1MB 1:1: %d\n", rc);
> + return rc;
> + }
> +
> + printk("** Populating memory map **\n");
> + /* Populate memory map. */
> + for ( i = 0; i < d->arch.nr_e820; i++ )
> + {
> + if ( d->arch.e820[i].type != E820_RAM )
> + continue;
> +
> + hvm_populate_memory_range(d, d->arch.e820[i].addr,
> + d->arch.e820[i].size);
> + if ( d->arch.e820[i].addr < MB(1) )
> + {
> + unsigned long end = min_t(unsigned long,
> + d->arch.e820[i].addr + d->arch.e820[i].size,
> MB(1));
> +
> + saved_current = current;
> + set_current(v);
> + rc = hvm_copy_to_guest_phys(d->arch.e820[i].addr,
> + maddr_to_virt(d->arch.e820[i].addr),
> + end - d->arch.e820[i].addr);
> + set_current(saved_current);
> + if ( rc != HVMCOPY_okay )
> + {
> + printk("Unable to copy RAM region %#lx - %#lx\n",
> + d->arch.e820[i].addr, end);
> + return -EFAULT;
> + }
> + }
> + }
> +
> + printk("Memory allocation stats:\n");
> + for ( i = 0; i <= MAX_ORDER; i++ )
> + {
> + if ( hvm_mem_stats[MAX_ORDER - i] != 0 )
> + printk("Order %2u: %pZ\n", MAX_ORDER - i,
> + _p(((uint64_t)1 << (MAX_ORDER - i + PAGE_SHIFT)) *
> + hvm_mem_stats[MAX_ORDER - i]));
> + }
> +
> + if ( cpu_has_vmx && paging_mode_hap(d) && !vmx_unrestricted_guest(v) )
> + {
> + /*
> + * Since Dom0 cannot be migrated, we will only setup the
> + * unrestricted guest helpers if they are needed by the current
> + * hardware we are running on.
> + */
> + rc = hvm_setup_vmx_unrestricted_guest(d);
Calling a function of this name inside an if() checking for
!vmx_unrestricted_guest() is, well, odd.
> static int __init construct_dom0_hvm(struct domain *d, const module_t *image,
> unsigned long image_headroom,
> module_t *initrd,
> void *(*bootstrap_map)(const module_t
> *),
> char *cmdline)
> {
> + int rc;
>
> printk("** Building a PVH Dom0 **\n");
>
> + /* Sanity! */
> + BUG_ON(d->domain_id != 0);
> + BUG_ON(d->vcpu[0] == NULL);
May I suggest
BUG_ON(d->domain_id);
BUG_ON(!d->vcpu[0]);
in cases like this?
> + process_pending_softirqs();
Why, outside of any loop?
Jan
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
 |
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |