[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[PATCH v3 07/12] x86/shadow: OOS doesn't track VAs anymore
- To: "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- From: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 16 May 2023 09:40:50 +0200
- Arc-authentication-results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=suse.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=suse.com; dkim=pass header.d=suse.com; arc=none
- Arc-message-signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-ChunkCount:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-0:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-1; bh=H9Nh4XX47pvzSkaQ+Ro93eqswTOe4k38U8vTCnXpMhA=; b=NdiUpbXW9NKtSDqhLs32Z2wHbUDmcJC7x9Kf3O4Q5mRuH04o633QBggfD6i3T76FvLyo99jNlV8NhW696Ft5izNKDwjCpFVbbHwnwbxJ5xWvjRjuDn8R9eC4NiNB9MT7cSPI8+aoFUF/pL3CZRp1UVFYkMCB+yTc4v7kWVryvneLGnnsTXKutDFT1XkxVCrNcaTEz6fW2/3EB+dNxSzG5TNYUTEJfzKWxeeod9JZOPxgaCDj51oEzbiMB1gDKnANVcTY/iFmP9PRv/nbDYggLtpS8F/UEccOWw4K5M+kJG2Yc+9HF9Ll4SE4RYnizc97jC4img3w6wGW0mSJwCGysw==
- Arc-seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=LESN9Lz+A77zqz/xxXRoqlGtXA+cx+68kKUgkcioU7YfAEVQ3KzAyAw4InYh4Xt9wPIPn2BcLhyx1p4ghOoH40DEXYtJjM2OkJcQmdYiECF1yrzC1YFaS99SlUDnYiM32D+KAPKLIfS/pYCUPgcn+D0zGUzJtbH6YV1SCYu8mPoOETYdaPZHn0hWGvDnAJKDBLDBer7w2YCdtjbwEyUqBDEh8OvsqoWCpl180rVrpoQT8MJqimIteTzKnMdQicb+dhkIcw2KqXF5ESq0rPxLR28wMf4Etx1xojmLk88P0rUuGNOmMHTB7/+mtte9o3KEB4welbvD3UCBlHRrZL1JiQ==
- Authentication-results: dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;dmarc=none action=none header.from=suse.com;
- Cc: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>, Wei Liu <wl@xxxxxxx>, Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx>, George Dunlap <george.dunlap@xxxxxxxxxx>, Tim Deegan <tim@xxxxxxx>
- Delivery-date: Tue, 16 May 2023 07:40:57 +0000
- List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>
The tracking lasted only for about two weeks, but the related comment
parts were never purged.
Fixes: 50b74f55e0c0 ("OOS cleanup: Fixup arrays instead of fixup tables")
Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
---
I'm heavily inclined to fold this into "x86/shadow: move OOS functions
to their own file".
This largely removes the justification for the per-vCPU hash. Is there
any other reason to name there in exchange?
---
v3: New.
--- a/xen/arch/x86/mm/shadow/oos.c
+++ b/xen/arch/x86/mm/shadow/oos.c
@@ -51,13 +51,10 @@
*
* Currently out-of-sync pages are listed in a simple open-addressed
* hash table with a second chance (must resist temptation to radically
- * over-engineer hash tables...) The virtual address of the access
- * which caused us to unsync the page is also kept in the hash table, as
- * a hint for finding the writable mappings later.
+ * over-engineer hash tables...).
*
* We keep a hash per vcpu, because we want as much as possible to do
- * the re-sync on the save vcpu we did the unsync on, so the VA hint
- * will be valid.
+ * the re-sync on the same vcpu we did the unsync on.
*/
#if SHADOW_AUDIT & SHADOW_AUDIT_ENTRIES_FULL
|
