[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v5] x86/altp2m: Aggregate get entry and populate into common funcs
On 4/16/19 3:19 PM, Tamas K Lengyel wrote: > On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 8:02 AM George Dunlap <george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxx> > wrote: >> >> On 4/16/19 2:44 PM, Tamas K Lengyel wrote: >>> On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 2:45 AM Alexandru Stefan ISAILA >>> <aisaila@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> >>>> The code for getting the entry and then populating was repeated in >>>> p2m_change_altp2m_gfn() and in p2m_set_altp2m_mem_access(). >>>> >>>> The code is now in one place with a bool param that lets the caller choose >>>> if it populates after get_entry(). >>>> >>>> If remapping is being done then both the old and new gfn's should be >>>> unshared in the hostp2m for keeping things consistent. The page type >>>> of old_gfn was already checked whether it's p2m_ram_rw and bail if it >>>> wasn't so functionality-wise this just simplifies things as a user >>>> doesn't have to request unsharing manually before remapping. >>>> Now, if the new_gfn is invalid it shouldn't query the hostp2m as >>>> that is effectively a request to remove the entry from the altp2m. >>>> But provided that scenario is used only when removing entries that >>>> were previously remapped/copied to the altp2m, those entries already >>>> went through P2M_ALLOC | P2M_UNSHARE before, so it won't have an >>>> affect so the core function get_altp2m_entry() is calling >>>> __get_gfn_type_access() with P2M_ALLOC | P2M_UNSHARE. >>>> >>>> altp2m_get_entry_direct() is also called in p2m_set_suppress_ve() >>>> because on a new altp2m view the function will fail with invalid mfn if >>>> p2m->set_entry() was not called before. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Alexandru Isaila <aisaila@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>>> Signed-off-by: George Dunlap <george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxx> >>>> Reviewed-by: George Dunlap <george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxx> >>>> >>>> --- >>>> Changes since V4: >>>> - Add altp2m to patch name >>>> - Change func name from get_altp2m_entry() to >>>> altp2m_get_entry(). >>>> --- >>>> xen/arch/x86/mm/mem_access.c | 30 ++----------- >>>> xen/arch/x86/mm/p2m.c | 84 ++++++++++++++++++++---------------- >>>> xen/include/asm-x86/p2m.h | 17 ++++++++ >>>> 3 files changed, 66 insertions(+), 65 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/mm/mem_access.c b/xen/arch/x86/mm/mem_access.c >>>> index a144bb0ce4..ddfe0169c0 100644 >>>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/mm/mem_access.c >>>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/mm/mem_access.c >>>> @@ -262,35 +262,11 @@ int p2m_set_altp2m_mem_access(struct domain *d, >>>> struct p2m_domain *hp2m, >>>> mfn_t mfn; >>>> p2m_type_t t; >>>> p2m_access_t old_a; >>>> - unsigned int page_order; >>>> - unsigned long gfn_l = gfn_x(gfn); >>>> int rc; >>>> >>>> - mfn = ap2m->get_entry(ap2m, gfn, &t, &old_a, 0, NULL, NULL); >>>> - >>>> - /* Check host p2m if no valid entry in alternate */ >>>> - if ( !mfn_valid(mfn) ) >>>> - { >>>> - >>>> - mfn = __get_gfn_type_access(hp2m, gfn_l, &t, &old_a, >>>> - P2M_ALLOC | P2M_UNSHARE, &page_order, >>>> 0); >>>> - >>>> - rc = -ESRCH; >>>> - if ( !mfn_valid(mfn) || t != p2m_ram_rw ) >>>> - return rc; >>>> - >>>> - /* If this is a superpage, copy that first */ >>>> - if ( page_order != PAGE_ORDER_4K ) >>>> - { >>>> - unsigned long mask = ~((1UL << page_order) - 1); >>>> - gfn_t gfn2 = _gfn(gfn_l & mask); >>>> - mfn_t mfn2 = _mfn(mfn_x(mfn) & mask); >>>> - >>>> - rc = ap2m->set_entry(ap2m, gfn2, mfn2, page_order, t, old_a, >>>> 1); >>>> - if ( rc ) >>>> - return rc; >>>> - } >>>> - } >>>> + rc = altp2m_get_entry_prepopulate(ap2m, gfn, &mfn, &t, &old_a); >>>> + if ( rc ) >>>> + return rc; >>>> >>>> /* >>>> * Inherit the old suppress #VE bit value if it is already set, or >>>> set it >>>> diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/mm/p2m.c b/xen/arch/x86/mm/p2m.c >>>> index 9e81a30cc4..7bedfd593b 100644 >>>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/mm/p2m.c >>>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/mm/p2m.c >>> >>> Wouldn't it make more sense to start adding new altp2m functions to >>> mm/altp2m.c instead? Probably the altp2m functions from mm/p2m.c could >>> also be relocated there at some point in the future. >>> >>>> @@ -478,6 +478,43 @@ void p2m_unlock_and_tlb_flush(struct p2m_domain *p2m) >>>> mm_write_unlock(&p2m->lock); >>>> } >>>> >>>> +int altp2m_get_entry(struct p2m_domain *ap2m, >>>> + gfn_t gfn, mfn_t *mfn, p2m_type_t *t, >>>> + p2m_access_t *a, bool prepopulate) >>>> +{ >>>> + *mfn = ap2m->get_entry(ap2m, gfn, t, a, 0, NULL, NULL); >>>> + >>>> + /* Check host p2m if no valid entry in alternate */ >>>> + if ( !mfn_valid(*mfn) && !p2m_is_hostp2m(ap2m) ) >>>> + { >>>> + struct p2m_domain *hp2m = p2m_get_hostp2m(ap2m->domain); >>>> + unsigned int page_order; >>>> + int rc; >>>> + >>>> + *mfn = __get_gfn_type_access(hp2m, gfn_x(gfn), t, a, >>>> + P2M_ALLOC | P2M_UNSHARE, >>>> &page_order, 0); >>> >>> So despite the name being altp2m_get_entry you now return an entry >>> from the hostp2m, even if prepopulate is false. If the caller knows it >>> doesn't want that entry to be copied into the altp2m, why not have it >>> call __get_gfn_type_access itself for the hostp2m? IMHO this is just >>> confusing and doesn't help readability of the altp2m code. >> >> You return the ap2m entry if it's present, or the hp2m entry if it's >> not. It's not a lot of duplication, but it makes the logic cleaner I >> think; why not deduplicate it? > > I have no problem with making the code more streamlined. The problem I > have is that the function's name doesn't suggest it would get you > anything but the entry from the specified altp2m. So you could be > reading the code assuming you are dealing with an entry from that > specified table when in fact you are not. That is not an expected > behavior based on just the name of the function. This is going to make > reading the altp2m code that much harder in the future. Right -- I wasn't a huge fan of 'direct' either; it didn't really convey to me 100% what the function did. My PoC had "seethrough", but that wasn't that great either. "Peek"? Any other suggestions? Other options: * If we have a single function with a #define, this might get a bit easier; we could have one be AP2MGET_dont_prepopulate or something. ( We could have the "core" function named _altp2m_get_entry, and have altp2m_get_entry() call with prepopulate = false, and altp2m_get_entry_prepopulate() call it with prepopulate = true. Thoughts? -George _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |