mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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
--

  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®