[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v10 5/6] x86/ioreq server: Asynchronously reset outstanding p2m_ioreq_server entries.
On 4/6/2017 12:35 AM, George Dunlap wrote: On 05/04/17 17:22, Yu Zhang wrote:On 4/5/2017 10:41 PM, George Dunlap wrote:On Sun, Apr 2, 2017 at 1:24 PM, Yu Zhang <yu.c.zhang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:After an ioreq server has unmapped, the remaining p2m_ioreq_server entries need to be reset back to p2m_ram_rw. This patch does this asynchronously with the current p2m_change_entry_type_global() interface. New field entry_count is introduced in struct p2m_domain, to record the number of p2m_ioreq_server p2m page table entries. One nature of these entries is that they only point to 4K sized page frames, because all p2m_ioreq_server entries are originated from p2m_ram_rw ones in p2m_change_type_one(). We do not need to worry about the counting for 2M/1G sized pages.Assuming that all p2m_ioreq_server entries are *created* by p2m_change_type_one() may valid, but can you assume that they are only ever *removed* by p2m_change_type_one() (or recalculation)? What happens, for instance, if a guest balloons out one of the ram pages? I don't immediately see anything preventing a p2m_ioreq_server page from being ballooned out, nor anything on the decrease_reservation() path decreasing p2m->ioreq.entry_count. Or did I miss something? Other than that, only one minor comment...Thanks for your thorough consideration, George. But I do not think we need to worry about this: If the emulation is in process, the balloon driver cannot get a p2m_ioreq_server page - because it is already allocated.In theory, yes, the guest *shouldn't* do this. But what if the guest OS makes a mistake? Or, what if the ioreq server makes a mistake and places a watch on a page that *isn't* allocated by the device driver, or forgets to change a page type back to ram when the device driver frees it back to the guest kernel? Then the lazy p2m change code will be triggered, and this page is reset to p2m_ram_rw before being set to p2m_invalid, just like the normal path. Will this be a problem? It's the hypervisor's job to do the right thing even if the guest and the device model don't.And even when emulation is finished, the balloon driver successfully get this page, and triggers decrease_reservation, the purpose is to remove the current mapping relation between the gfn and mfn in p2m. So IIUC, p2m_remove_page() will be triggered if everything is goes fine, and then p2m_set_entry(), which will trigger the recalc logic eventually, either in ept_set_entry() or p2m_pt_set_entry(). Then the entry_count will be updated in the recalc logic.Yes, once the lazy type change has been made, we can rely on the recalculation logic to make sure that the types are changed appropriately. Yep. So my understanding is that as long as p2m_set_entry() is used to change the p2m, we do not need to worry about this. B.R. Yu -George _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |