From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
To: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
Cc: David Matlack <dmatlack@google.com>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
David Stevens <stevensd@chromium.org>,
Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] KVM: x86/mmu: Rework marking folios dirty/accessed
Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2024 16:06:33 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <9b0f5285-bbce-41a1-9c74-74051ca3f9b1@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZhAD3hQwI0ltYnFp@google.com>
On 4/5/24 15:59, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> Ya, from commit c13fda237f08 ("KVM: Assert that notifier count is elevated in
> .change_pte()"):
>
> x86 and MIPS are clearcut nops if the old SPTE is not-present, and that
> is guaranteed due to the prior invalidation. PPC simply unmaps the SPTE,
> which again should be a nop due to the invalidation. arm64 is a bit
> murky, but it's also likely a nop because kvm_pgtable_stage2_map() is
> called without a cache pointer, which means it will map an entry if and
> only if an existing PTE was found.
>
> I'm 100% in favor of removing .change_pte(). As I've said multiple times, the
> only reason I haven't sent a patch is because I didn't want it to prompt someone
> into resurrecting the original behavior. 🙂
Ah, this indeed reminded me of discussions we had in the past. Patches
sent now:
https://lore.kernel.org/kvm/20240405115815.3226315-1-pbonzini@redhat.com/
and I don't think anyone would try to resurrect the original behavior.
It made some sense when there was an .invalidate_page() callback as
well, but the whole thing started to crumble when .invalidate_page() was
made sleepable, plus as David noticed it's very poorly documented where
to use set_pte_at_notify() vs. set_pte_at().
As I wrote in the cover letter above, the only reason why it has never
caused a bug is because it was doing nothing...
Paolo
prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-04-05 14:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-03-20 0:50 Sean Christopherson
2024-03-20 0:50 ` [RFC PATCH 1/4] KVM: x86/mmu: Skip the "try unsync" path iff the old SPTE was a leaf SPTE Sean Christopherson
2024-03-20 0:50 ` [RFC PATCH 2/4] KVM: x86/mmu: Mark folio dirty when creating SPTE, not when zapping/modifying Sean Christopherson
2024-03-20 0:50 ` [RFC PATCH 3/4] KVM: x86/mmu: Mark page/folio accessed only when zapping leaf SPTEs Sean Christopherson
2024-03-20 0:50 ` [RFC PATCH 4/4] KVM: x86/mmu: Don't force flush if SPTE update clears Accessed bit Sean Christopherson
2024-03-20 12:56 ` [RFC PATCH 0/4] KVM: x86/mmu: Rework marking folios dirty/accessed David Hildenbrand
2024-04-02 17:38 ` David Matlack
2024-04-02 18:31 ` David Hildenbrand
2024-04-03 0:17 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-04-03 21:43 ` David Hildenbrand
2024-04-03 22:19 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-04-04 15:44 ` David Hildenbrand
2024-04-04 17:31 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-04-04 18:23 ` David Hildenbrand
2024-04-04 22:02 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-04-05 6:53 ` David Hildenbrand
2024-04-05 9:37 ` Paolo Bonzini
2024-04-05 10:14 ` David Hildenbrand
2024-04-05 13:59 ` Sean Christopherson
2024-04-05 14:06 ` Paolo Bonzini [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=9b0f5285-bbce-41a1-9c74-74051ca3f9b1@redhat.com \
--to=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=dmatlack@google.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=stevensd@chromium.org \
--cc=willy@infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®