[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH for-4.5 v11 4/9] xen/arm: Data abort exception (R/W) mem_events.
On 09/29/2014 01:52 PM, Julien Grall wrote: > On 09/29/2014 01:47 PM, Tamas K Lengyel wrote: >> > +/* Set access type for a region of pfns. >> > + * If start_pfn == -1ul, sets the default access type */ >> > +long p2m_set_mem_access(struct domain *d, unsigned long pfn, uint32_t >> nr, >> > + uint32_t start, uint32_t mask, >> xenmem_access_t access) >> > +{ >> >> >> [..] >> >> > + >> > + rc = apply_p2m_changes(d, MEMACCESS, >> > + pfn_to_paddr(pfn+start), >> pfn_to_paddr(pfn+nr), >> > + 0, MATTR_MEM, mask, 0, a); >> > + >> > + flush_tlb_domain(d); >> > + iommu_iotlb_flush(d, pfn+start, nr-start); >> >> With your solution, when rc == 0 (i.e the call memaccess has been fully >> applied), you will have one more TLB flush: one in apply_p2m_changes, >> the other one here... >> >> >> No, I don't flush it in apply_p2m_changes, *flush is not set to true in >> MEMACCESS in this version. > > Oh right, sorry I haven't noticed it. > >> As this code already exists in apply_p2m_changes but in the wrong place, >> why didn't you move it later? >> >> >> The problem is with the preemption case that just goes to out. I found >> it cleaner to just flush the tlb here for both cases instead of having >> the preemption case going to a flush: label then to out. If that's >> preferred, I'm OK with that approach too. > > What is the issue to do? > > out: > if ( flush ) > { > TLB flush > } > > if ( rc < 0 && ( op == INSERT .... > > ... > > return rc; > > I would prefer if you have to duplicate the flush here and at the same I meant avoid of course. > time you will fix other flush issue in the different path in case of error. > > Regards, > -- Julien Grall _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |