[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] xen_exit_mmap() questions
On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 1:00 PM, Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 04/27/2017 12:46 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote: >> On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 6:21 AM, Boris Ostrovsky >> <boris.ostrovsky@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>>>>>> Also, this code in drop_other_mm_ref() looks dubious to me: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> /* If this cpu still has a stale cr3 reference, then make sure >>>>>>>> it has been flushed. */ >>>>>>>> if (this_cpu_read(xen_current_cr3) == __pa(mm->pgd)) >>>>>>>> load_cr3(swapper_pg_dir); >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> If cr3 hasn't been flushed to the hypervisor because we're in a lazy >>>>>>>> mode, why would load_cr3() help? Shouldn't this be xen_mc_flush() >>>>>>>> instead? >>>>>>> load_cr3() actually ends with xen_mc_flush() by way of xen_write_cr3() >>>>>>> -> xen_mc_issue(). >>>>>> xen_mc_issue() does: >>>>>> >>>>>> if ((paravirt_get_lazy_mode() & mode) == 0) >>>>>> xen_mc_flush(); >>>>>> >>>>>> I assume the load_cr3() is intended to deal with the case where we're >>>>>> in lazy mode, but we'll still be in lazy mode, right? Or does it >>>>>> serve some other purpose? >>>>> Of course. I can't read (I ignored the "== 0" part). >>>>> >>>>> Apparently the early version had an explicit flush but then it disappeared >>>>> (commit 9f79991d4186089e228274196413572cc000143b). >>>>> >>>>> The point of CR3 loading here, I believe, is to make sure the hypervisor >>>>> knows that the (v)CPU is no longer using the the mm's cr3 (we are loading >>>>> swapper_pgdir here). >>>> But that's what leave_mm() does. To be fair, the x86 lazy TLB >>>> management is a big mess, and this came up because I'm trying to clean >>>> it up without removing it. >>> True. I don't know though if you can guarantee that leave_mm() (or >>> load_cr3() inside it) is actually called if we are in lazy mode. >> The code just before that makes these calls. > > Yes, and I was unsure whether we always get to make these calls, based > on mm and cpu_tlbstate. I think we do and with your changes it is made > even more clear. :) > >> >> Anyway, I propose to rewrite the whole thing like this: >> >> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/luto/linux.git/commit/?h=x86/tlbflush_cleanup&id=ff143a54bb3bafaaad6e32145a9cfbc112e8584f > > Can you explain xen_pgd_free() change? When do you expect > xen_exit_mmap() to fail unpinning (compared to what we have now)? I don't expect it to fail, but I made fairly extensive changes. --Andy _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |