From: "Jürgen Groß" <jgross@suse.com>
To: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
Cc: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@kernel.org>,
Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Oleksandr Tyshchenko <oleksandr_tyshchenko@epam.com>,
xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
x86@kernel.org, iommu@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] xen/swiotlb: don't destroy contiguous region in all cases
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2025 12:11:22 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ce7320b6-68f3-43b1-8812-3a5bbd75c9c6@suse.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <abe2138d-b1a7-4e53-ae5f-ea3c393d50c5@suse.com>
[-- Attachment #1.1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4055 bytes --]
On 12.02.25 08:38, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 11.02.2025 13:04, Juergen Gross wrote:
>> In case xen_swiotlb_alloc_coherent() needed to create a contiguous
>> region only for other reason than the memory not being compliant with
>> the device's DMA mask, there is no reason why this contiguous region
>> should be destroyed by xen_swiotlb_free_coherent() later. Destroying
>> this region should be done only, if the memory of the region was
>> allocated with more stringent placement requirements than the memory
>> it did replace.
>
> I'm not convinced of this: Even the mere property of being contiguous
> may already be enough to warrant freeing when possible. The hypervisor
> may not have that many contiguous areas available. The bigger the
> chunk, the more important to give it back once no longer needed in
> this shape.
Really? When creating a domain Xen tries to use GB pages and 2MB pages as
much as possible. Why would this special case here have more restrictions?
> Plus also take into account how Xen behaves here: It specifically tries
> to hold back, during boot, lower addressed memory to later satisfy such
> requests. Hence even if you don't ask for address restricted memory,
> you may get back such. You'd need to compare input and output addresses,
> not input addresses and requested restriction to alleviate this.
Fair enough.
>
>> --- a/arch/x86/xen/mmu_pv.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/xen/mmu_pv.c
>> @@ -2208,19 +2208,22 @@ void __init xen_init_mmu_ops(void)
>> static unsigned long discontig_frames[1<<MAX_CONTIG_ORDER];
>>
>> #define VOID_PTE (mfn_pte(0, __pgprot(0)))
>> -static void xen_zap_pfn_range(unsigned long vaddr, unsigned int order,
>> - unsigned long *in_frames,
>> - unsigned long *out_frames)
>> +static int xen_zap_pfn_range(unsigned long vaddr, unsigned int order,
>> + unsigned long *in_frames,
>> + unsigned long *out_frames)
>> {
>> int i;
>> + u64 address_bits = 0;
>
> First I was inclined to suggest to use paddr_t here, but ...
>
>> struct multicall_space mcs;
>>
>> xen_mc_batch();
>> for (i = 0; i < (1UL<<order); i++, vaddr += PAGE_SIZE) {
>> mcs = __xen_mc_entry(0);
>>
>> - if (in_frames)
>> + if (in_frames) {
>> in_frames[i] = virt_to_mfn((void *)vaddr);
>> + address_bits |= in_frames[i] << PAGE_SHIFT;
>
> ... why do a shift on every loop iteration when you can ...
>
>> + }
>>
>> MULTI_update_va_mapping(mcs.mc, vaddr, VOID_PTE, 0);
>> __set_phys_to_machine(virt_to_pfn((void *)vaddr), INVALID_P2M_ENTRY);
>> @@ -2229,6 +2232,8 @@ static void xen_zap_pfn_range(unsigned long vaddr, unsigned int order,
>> out_frames[i] = virt_to_pfn((void *)vaddr);
>> }
>> xen_mc_issue(0);
>> +
>> + return fls64(address_bits);
>
> ... simply add in PAGE_SHIFT here, once?
True.
>
>> @@ -2321,7 +2326,8 @@ static int xen_exchange_memory(unsigned long extents_in, unsigned int order_in,
>>
>> int xen_create_contiguous_region(phys_addr_t pstart, unsigned int order,
>> unsigned int address_bits,
>> - dma_addr_t *dma_handle)
>> + dma_addr_t *dma_handle,
>> + unsigned int *address_bits_in)
>> {
>> unsigned long *in_frames = discontig_frames, out_frame;
>> unsigned long flags;
>> @@ -2336,7 +2342,7 @@ int xen_create_contiguous_region(phys_addr_t pstart, unsigned int order,
>> spin_lock_irqsave(&xen_reservation_lock, flags);
>>
>> /* 1. Zap current PTEs, remembering MFNs. */
>> - xen_zap_pfn_range(vstart, order, in_frames, NULL);
>> + *address_bits_in = xen_zap_pfn_range(vstart, order, in_frames, NULL);
>
> Nit: Converting plain int to unsigned int, when there's no real reason
> to do any conversion. Since xen_zap_pfn_range() can't return a negative
> value for the caller caring about the return value (yet more obviously
> so with the suggested adjustment, and then true for both callers), the
> function could easily return unsigned int.
Will change that.
Juergen
[-- Attachment #1.1.2: OpenPGP public key --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-keys, Size: 3743 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 495 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-02-12 11:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-02-11 12:04 [PATCH 0/2] xen/swiotlb: one fix and one optimization Juergen Gross
2025-02-11 12:04 ` [PATCH 1/2] xen/swiotlb: relax alignment requirements Juergen Gross
2025-02-12 1:23 ` Stefano Stabellini
2025-02-12 6:53 ` Jan Beulich
2025-02-12 11:04 ` Jürgen Groß
2025-02-11 12:04 ` [PATCH 2/2] xen/swiotlb: don't destroy contiguous region in all cases Juergen Gross
2025-02-12 1:30 ` Stefano Stabellini
2025-02-12 11:15 ` Jürgen Groß
2025-02-12 21:14 ` Stefano Stabellini
2025-02-12 7:38 ` Jan Beulich
2025-02-12 11:11 ` Jürgen Groß [this message]
2025-02-12 11:49 ` Jan Beulich
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=ce7320b6-68f3-43b1-8812-3a5bbd75c9c6@suse.com \
--to=jgross@suse.com \
--cc=boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=iommu@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=jbeulich@suse.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=oleksandr_tyshchenko@epam.com \
--cc=sstabellini@kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xenproject.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®