From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
To: David Matlack <dmatlack@google.com>
Cc: James Houghton <jthoughton@google.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
Vipin Sharma <vipinsh@google.com>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 3/7] KVM: x86/mmu: Recover TDP MMU NX huge pages using MMU read lock
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2025 14:38:54 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aIft7sUk_w8rV2DB@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CALzav=e0cUTMzox7p3AU37wAFRrOXEDdU24eqe6DX+UZYt9FeQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon, Jul 28, 2025, David Matlack wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 28, 2025 at 11:08 AM James Houghton <jthoughton@google.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 23, 2025 at 1:35 PM Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com> wrote:
> > > > @@ -7559,8 +7590,17 @@ static void kvm_recover_nx_huge_pages(struct kvm *kvm,
> > > > rcu_read_lock();
> > > >
> > > > for ( ; to_zap; --to_zap) {
> > > > - if (list_empty(nx_huge_pages))
> > > > +#ifdef CONFIG_X86_64
> > >
> > > These #ifdefs still make me sad, but I also still think they're the least awful
> > > solution. And hopefully we will jettison 32-bit sooner than later :-)
> >
> > Yeah I couldn't come up with anything better. :(
>
> Could we just move the definition of tdp_mmu_pages_lock outside of
> CONFIG_X86_64? The only downside I can think of is slightly larger kvm
> structs for 32-bit builds.
Hmm, I was going to say "no, because we'd also need to do spin_lock_init()", but
obviously spin_(un)lock() will only ever be invoked for 64-bit kernels. I still
don't love the idea of making tdp_mmu_pages_lock visible outside of CONFIG_X86_64,
it feels like we're just asking to introduce (likely benign) bugs.
Ugh, and I just noticed this as well:
#ifndef CONFIG_X86_64
#define KVM_TDP_MMU -1
#endif
Rather than expose kvm->arch.tdp_mmu_pages_lock, what about using a single #ifdef
section to bury both is_tdp_mmu and a local kvm->arch.tdp_mmu_pages_lock pointer?
Alternatively, we could do:
const bool is_tdp_mmu = IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_X86_64) && mmu_type != KVM_SHADOW_MMU;
to avoid referencing KVM_TDP_MMU, but that's quite ugly. Overall, I think the
below strikes the best balance between polluting the code with #ifdefs, and
generating robust code.
diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h
index 52bf6a886bfd..c038d7cd187d 100644
--- a/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h
+++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h
@@ -1372,10 +1372,6 @@ enum kvm_mmu_type {
KVM_NR_MMU_TYPES,
};
-#ifndef CONFIG_X86_64
-#define KVM_TDP_MMU -1
-#endif
-
struct kvm_arch {
unsigned long n_used_mmu_pages;
unsigned long n_requested_mmu_pages;
diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c
index a6a1fb42b2d1..e2bde6a5e346 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c
@@ -7624,8 +7624,14 @@ static bool kvm_mmu_sp_dirty_logging_enabled(struct kvm *kvm,
static void kvm_recover_nx_huge_pages(struct kvm *kvm,
const enum kvm_mmu_type mmu_type)
{
+#ifdef CONFIG_X86_64
+ const bool is_tdp_mmu = mmu_type == KVM_TDP_MMU;
+ spinlock_t *tdp_mmu_pages_lock = &kvm->arch.tdp_mmu_pages_lock;
+#else
+ const bool is_tdp_mmu = false;
+ spinlock_t *tdp_mmu_pages_lock = NULL;
+#endif
unsigned long to_zap = nx_huge_pages_to_zap(kvm, mmu_type);
- bool is_tdp_mmu = mmu_type == KVM_TDP_MMU;
struct list_head *nx_huge_pages;
struct kvm_mmu_page *sp;
LIST_HEAD(invalid_list);
@@ -7648,15 +7654,12 @@ static void kvm_recover_nx_huge_pages(struct kvm *kvm,
rcu_read_lock();
for ( ; to_zap; --to_zap) {
-#ifdef CONFIG_X86_64
if (is_tdp_mmu)
- spin_lock(&kvm->arch.tdp_mmu_pages_lock);
-#endif
+ spin_lock(tdp_mmu_pages_lock);
+
if (list_empty(nx_huge_pages)) {
-#ifdef CONFIG_X86_64
if (is_tdp_mmu)
- spin_unlock(&kvm->arch.tdp_mmu_pages_lock);
-#endif
+ spin_unlock(tdp_mmu_pages_lock);
break;
}
@@ -7675,10 +7678,8 @@ static void kvm_recover_nx_huge_pages(struct kvm *kvm,
unaccount_nx_huge_page(kvm, sp);
-#ifdef CONFIG_X86_64
if (is_tdp_mmu)
- spin_unlock(&kvm->arch.tdp_mmu_pages_lock);
-#endif
+ spin_unlock(tdp_mmu_pages_lock);
/*
* Do not attempt to recover any NX Huge Pages that are being
--
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-07-28 21:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-07-07 22:47 [PATCH v5 0/7] KVM: x86/mmu: Run TDP MMU NX huge page recovery under " James Houghton
2025-07-07 22:47 ` [PATCH v5 1/7] KVM: x86/mmu: Track TDP MMU NX huge pages separately James Houghton
2025-08-19 17:57 ` Sean Christopherson
2025-07-07 22:47 ` [PATCH v5 2/7] KVM: x86/mmu: Rename kvm_tdp_mmu_zap_sp() to better indicate its purpose James Houghton
2025-07-07 22:47 ` [PATCH v5 3/7] KVM: x86/mmu: Recover TDP MMU NX huge pages using MMU read lock James Houghton
2025-07-23 20:34 ` Sean Christopherson
2025-07-28 18:07 ` James Houghton
2025-07-28 18:17 ` David Matlack
2025-07-28 21:38 ` Sean Christopherson [this message]
2025-07-28 21:48 ` James Houghton
2025-08-01 18:17 ` David Matlack
2025-08-01 22:00 ` Sean Christopherson
2025-08-12 19:21 ` David Matlack
2025-07-07 22:47 ` [PATCH v5 4/7] KVM: x86/mmu: Only grab RCU lock for nx hugepage recovery for TDP MMU James Houghton
2025-07-23 20:38 ` Sean Christopherson
2025-07-28 17:51 ` James Houghton
2025-07-07 22:47 ` [PATCH v5 5/7] KVM: selftests: Introduce a selftest to measure execution performance James Houghton
2025-07-23 20:50 ` Sean Christopherson
2025-07-29 0:18 ` James Houghton
2025-07-07 22:47 ` [PATCH v5 6/7] KVM: selftests: Provide extra mmap flags in vm_mem_add() James Houghton
2025-07-07 22:47 ` [PATCH v5 7/7] KVM: selftests: Add an NX huge pages jitter test James Houghton
2025-07-23 21:04 ` Sean Christopherson
2025-07-28 18:40 ` James Houghton
2025-08-01 14:11 ` Sean Christopherson
2025-08-01 18:45 ` James Houghton
2025-08-01 22:30 ` Sean Christopherson
2025-07-23 20:44 ` [PATCH v5 0/7] KVM: x86/mmu: Run TDP MMU NX huge page recovery under MMU read lock Sean Christopherson
2025-07-29 0:19 ` James Houghton
2025-08-19 23:12 ` Sean Christopherson
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=aIft7sUk_w8rV2DB@google.com \
--to=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=dmatlack@google.com \
--cc=jthoughton@google.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=vipinsh@google.com \
/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®