[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [PATCH v4 14/21] x86: introduce helper for recording degree of contiguity in page tables
On 06.05.2022 15:25, Roger Pau Monné wrote: > On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 10:41:23AM +0200, Jan Beulich wrote: >> --- /dev/null >> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/include/asm/pt-contig-markers.h >> @@ -0,0 +1,105 @@ >> +#ifndef __ASM_X86_PT_CONTIG_MARKERS_H >> +#define __ASM_X86_PT_CONTIG_MARKERS_H >> + >> +/* >> + * Short of having function templates in C, the function defined below is >> + * intended to be used by multiple parties interested in recording the >> + * degree of contiguity in mappings by a single page table. >> + * >> + * Scheme: Every entry records the order of contiguous successive entries, >> + * up to the maximum order covered by that entry (which is the number of >> + * clear low bits in its index, with entry 0 being the exception using >> + * the base-2 logarithm of the number of entries in a single page table). >> + * While a few entries need touching upon update, knowing whether the >> + * table is fully contiguous (and can hence be replaced by a higher level >> + * leaf entry) is then possible by simply looking at entry 0's marker. >> + * >> + * Prereqs: >> + * - CONTIG_MASK needs to be #define-d, to a value having at least 4 >> + * contiguous bits (ignored by hardware), before including this file, >> + * - page tables to be passed here need to be initialized with correct >> + * markers. > > Not sure it's very relevant, but might we worth adding that: > > - Null entries must have the PTE zeroed except for the CONTIG_MASK > region in order to be considered as inactive. NP, I've added an item along these lines. >> +static bool pt_update_contig_markers(uint64_t *pt, unsigned int idx, >> + unsigned int level, enum PTE_kind kind) >> +{ >> + unsigned int b, i = idx; >> + unsigned int shift = (level - 1) * CONTIG_LEVEL_SHIFT + PAGE_SHIFT; >> + >> + ASSERT(idx < CONTIG_NR); >> + ASSERT(!(pt[idx] & CONTIG_MASK)); >> + >> + /* Step 1: Reduce markers in lower numbered entries. */ >> + while ( i ) >> + { >> + b = find_first_set_bit(i); >> + i &= ~(1U << b); >> + if ( GET_MARKER(pt[i]) > b ) >> + SET_MARKER(pt[i], b); > > Can't you exit early when you find an entry that already has the > to-be-set contiguous marker <= b, as lower numbered entries will then > also be <= b'? > > Ie: > > if ( GET_MARKER(pt[i]) <= b ) > break; > else > SET_MARKER(pt[i], b); Almost - I think it would need to be if ( GET_MARKER(pt[i]) < b ) break; if ( GET_MARKER(pt[i]) > b ) SET_MARKER(pt[i], b); or, accepting redundant updates, if ( GET_MARKER(pt[i]) < b ) break; SET_MARKER(pt[i], b); . Neither the redundant updates nor the extra (easily mis-predicted) conditional looked very appealing to me, but I guess I could change this if you are convinced that's better than continuing a loop with at most 9 (typically less) iterations. Jan
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |