From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
To: Leonardo Bras <leo.bras@arm.com>
Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
David Matlack <dmatlack@google.com>,
Ackerley Tng <ackerleytng@google.com>,
Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>, Josh Hilke <jrhilke@google.com>,
Oliver Upton <oupton@kernel.org>,
Wu Fei <wu.fei9@sanechips.com.cn>,
Steffen Eiden <seiden@linux.ibm.com>,
Claudio Imbrenda <imbrenda@linux.ibm.com>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/3] KVM: selftests: Check dirty-ring size before enabling
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2026 14:56:38 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ar7XFr51N_oK7hN-@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ar6SHjnMYNqiEpVa@LeoBrasDK>
On Thu, Oct 01, 2026, Leonardo Bras wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 01, 2026 at 03:46:51PM +0100, Leonardo Bras wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 30, 2026 at 01:31:25PM -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > > On Tue, Sep 29, 2026, Leonardo Bras wrote:
> > > > void vm_enable_dirty_ring(struct kvm_vm *vm, u32 ring_size)
> > > > {
> > > > - if (vm_check_cap(vm, KVM_CAP_DIRTY_LOG_RING_ACQ_REL))
> > > > - vm_enable_cap(vm, KVM_CAP_DIRTY_LOG_RING_ACQ_REL, ring_size);
> > > > - else
> > > > - vm_enable_cap(vm, KVM_CAP_DIRTY_LOG_RING, ring_size);
> > > > + long cap = KVM_CAP_DIRTY_LOG_RING_ACQ_REL;
> > > > + int max_size = vm_check_cap(vm, cap);
> > > > +
> > > > + if (!max_size) {
> > > > + cap = KVM_CAP_DIRTY_LOG_RING;
> > > > + max_size = vm_check_cap(vm, cap);
> > > > + }
> > > > +
> > > > + TEST_ASSERT(max_size > 0,
> > >
> > > Rather than open code this, which is kinda sorta going to show up in multiple
> > > places, what if we do this as a prep patch? Then vm_enable_dirty_ring() can use
> > > kvm_get_dirty_ring_cap() (completely untested).
> >
> > Sure, if you think it's useful :)
>
> Oh, vm_check_cap() is different than kvm_has_cap()/kvm_check_cap():
> IIUC, the vm* version will check if the extension is enabled in the current
> VM,
No, the VM-scoped version checks if the VM *can* support the capability in its
current configuration, e.g. some capabilities are fundamentally incompatible with
certain VM types.
> while the kvm* version will open a new /dev/kvm fd and check the
> extension there, probably meaning the CAP is available in the system.
>
> So, maybe we would need a slightly different approach?
> I.E. have the kvm_get_dirty_ring_cap() to use the VM version, and
> have dirty_ring_supported() to start the new /dev/kvm fd and free it later?
>
> What do you think?
It's not necessary in this case. All KVM_CHECK_EXTENSION calls feed into
kvm_vm_ioctl_check_extension_generic(), the only difference is that the @kvm
pointer will be NULL when called on /dev/kvm. While some capabilities do behave
differently if @kvm is valid, the majority do not, including the dirty ring ones:
case KVM_CAP_DIRTY_LOG_RING:
#ifdef CONFIG_HAVE_KVM_DIRTY_RING_TSO
return KVM_DIRTY_RING_MAX_ENTRIES * sizeof(struct kvm_dirty_gfn);
#else
return 0;
#endif
case KVM_CAP_DIRTY_LOG_RING_ACQ_REL:
#ifdef CONFIG_HAVE_KVM_DIRTY_RING_ACQ_REL
return KVM_DIRTY_RING_MAX_ENTRIES * sizeof(struct kvm_dirty_gfn);
#else
return 0;
#endif
I.e. the VM version and /dev/kvm version will always yield the same result. Very
theoretically that could change, but it's unlikely. And we can always update
KVM selftests in the unlikely case a specific VM type comes along that doesn't
support the dirty ring even when the broader architectures does.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-10-01 21:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-09-29 11:37 [PATCH v1 0/3] KVM: selftests: Add support for dirty-ring on dirty_log_perf_test Leonardo Bras
2026-09-29 11:37 ` [PATCH v1 1/3] KVM: selftests: memstress: Add option to enable dirty-ring on VM creation Leonardo Bras
2026-09-30 18:21 ` Sean Christopherson
2026-10-01 14:40 ` Leonardo Bras
2026-09-29 11:37 ` [PATCH v1 2/3] KVM: selftests: Check dirty-ring size before enabling Leonardo Bras
2026-09-30 20:31 ` Sean Christopherson
2026-10-01 14:46 ` Leonardo Bras
2026-10-01 17:02 ` Leonardo Bras
2026-10-01 21:56 ` Sean Christopherson [this message]
2026-10-02 11:14 ` Leonardo Bras
2026-10-01 23:18 ` Sean Christopherson
2026-10-02 11:14 ` Leonardo Bras
2026-09-29 11:37 ` [PATCH v1 3/3] KVM: selftests: dirty_log_perf_test: Add dirty-ring support Leonardo Bras
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=ar7XFr51N_oK7hN-@google.com \
--to=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=ackerleytng@google.com \
--cc=dmatlack@google.com \
--cc=imbrenda@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=jrhilke@google.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=leo.bras@arm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=oupton@kernel.org \
--cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
--cc=seiden@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=wu.fei9@sanechips.com.cn \
/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®