On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 05:02:50PM +0900, Takuya Yoshikawa wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Dec 2012 07:55:43 -0700
> Alex Williamson <alex.william...@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> > > Yes, the fix should work, but I do not want to update the
> > > generation from outside of update_memslots().
> >
> > Ok, then:
> >
> > diff --git a/include/linux/kvm_host.h b/include/linux/kvm_host.h
> > index 87089dd..c7b5061 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/kvm_host.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/kvm_host.h
> > @@ -413,7 +413,8 @@ void kvm_exit(void);
> >
> > void kvm_get_kvm(struct kvm *kvm);
> > void kvm_put_kvm(struct kvm *kvm);
> > -void update_memslots(struct kvm_memslots *slots, struct kvm_memory_slot
> > *new);
> > +void update_memslots(struct kvm_memslots *slots, struct kvm_memory_slot
> > *new,
> > + u64 last_generation);
> >
> > static inline struct kvm_memslots *kvm_memslots(struct kvm *kvm)
> > {
> > diff --git a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
> > index c4c8ec1..06961ea 100644
> > --- a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
> > +++ b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
> > @@ -667,7 +667,8 @@ static void sort_memslots(struct kvm_memslots *slots)
> > slots->id_to_index[slots->memslots[i].id] = i;
> > }
> >
> > -void update_memslots(struct kvm_memslots *slots, struct kvm_memory_slot
> > *new)
> > +void update_memslots(struct kvm_memslots *slots, struct kvm_memory_slot
> > *new,
> > + u64 last_generation)
> > {
> > if (new) {
> > int id = new->id;
> > @@ -679,7 +680,7 @@ void update_memslots(struct kvm_memslots *slots, struct
> > kvm_memory_slot *new)
> > sort_memslots(slots);
> > }
> >
> > - slots->generation++;
> > + slots->generation = last_generation + 1;
> > }
> >
> > static int check_memory_region_flags(struct kvm_userspace_memory_region
> > *mem)
> > @@ -814,7 +815,7 @@ int __kvm_set_memory_region(struct kvm *kvm,
> > slot = id_to_memslot(slots, mem->slot);
> > slot->flags |= KVM_MEMSLOT_INVALID;
> >
> > - update_memslots(slots, NULL);
> > + update_memslots(slots, NULL, kvm->memslots->generation);
> >
> > old_memslots = kvm->memslots;
> > rcu_assign_pointer(kvm->memslots, slots);
> > @@ -862,7 +863,7 @@ int __kvm_set_memory_region(struct kvm *kvm,
> > memset(&new.arch, 0, sizeof(new.arch));
> > }
> >
> > - update_memslots(slots, &new);
> > + update_memslots(slots, &new, kvm->memslots->generation);
> > old_memslots = kvm->memslots;
> > rcu_assign_pointer(kvm->memslots, slots);
> > synchronize_srcu_expedited(&kvm->srcu);
> >
> > > > The original patch can be reverted, there are no following dependencies,
> > > > but the idea was that we're making the memslot array larger, so there
> > > > could be more pressure in allocating it, so let's not trivially do extra
> > > > frees and allocs. Thanks,
> > >
> > > I agree that the current set_memory_region() is not good for frequent
> > > updates.
> > > But the alloc/free is not a major factor at the moment: flushing shadows
> > > should
> > > be more problematic.
> >
> > I don't understand why we'd throw away even a minor optimization that's
> > so easy to fix. We're not only removing a free/alloc, but we're being
> > more friendly to the cache by avoiding the extra memcpy. The above also
> > makes the generation management a bit more explicit. Thanks,
>
> Looks good to me!
>
Me too.
> I just wanted to keep the code readable, so no reason to object to
> a clean solution. Any chance to see the fix on kvm.git soon?
>
Soon after Alex will send proper patch with Signed-off-by.
--
Gleb.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
