Re: [PATCH v3 03/15] KVM: arm64: Refcount hyp stage-1 pgtable pages
From: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Date: 2021-12-13 12:53:12
Also in:
kvmarm, lkml
On Fri, Dec 10, 2021 at 02:34:16PM +0000, Quentin Perret wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
On Thursday 09 Dec 2021 at 10:29:24 (+0000), Will Deacon wrote:quoted
On Wed, Dec 01, 2021 at 05:03:57PM +0000, Quentin Perret wrote:quoted
To prepare the ground for allowing hyp stage-1 mappings to be removed at run-time, update the KVM page-table code to maintain a correct refcount using the ->{get,put}_page() function callbacks. Signed-off-by: Quentin Perret <redacted> --- arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/pgtable.c | 17 ++++++++++++++--- 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/pgtable.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/pgtable.c index f8ceebe4982e..768a58835153 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/pgtable.c +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/pgtable.c@@ -408,8 +408,10 @@ static bool hyp_map_walker_try_leaf(u64 addr, u64 end, u32 level, return false; new = kvm_init_valid_leaf_pte(phys, data->attr, level); - if (hyp_pte_needs_update(old, new)) + if (hyp_pte_needs_update(old, new)) { smp_store_release(ptep, new); + data->mm_ops->get_page(ptep);In the case where we're just updating software bits for a valid pte, doesn't this result in us taking a spurious reference to the page?Ahem, yes, that is the case. I ended up with the below diff to fix it, which I intend to fold in the next version:diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/pgtable.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/pgtable.c index 6ad4cb2d6947..e2047d3f05a2 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/pgtable.c +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/pgtable.c@@ -383,21 +383,6 @@ enum kvm_pgtable_prot kvm_pgtable_hyp_pte_prot(kvm_pte_t pte) return prot; } -static bool hyp_pte_needs_update(kvm_pte_t old, kvm_pte_t new) -{ - /* - * Tolerate KVM recreating the exact same mapping, or changing software - * bits if the existing mapping was valid. - */ - if (old == new) - return false; - - if (!kvm_pte_valid(old)) - return true; - - return !WARN_ON((old ^ new) & ~KVM_PTE_LEAF_ATTR_HI_SW); -} - static bool hyp_map_walker_try_leaf(u64 addr, u64 end, u32 level, kvm_pte_t *ptep, struct hyp_map_data *data) {@@ -407,13 +392,16 @@ static bool hyp_map_walker_try_leaf(u64 addr, u64 end, u32 level, if (!kvm_block_mapping_supported(addr, end, phys, level)) return false; + data->phys += granule; new = kvm_init_valid_leaf_pte(phys, data->attr, level); - if (hyp_pte_needs_update(old, new)) { - smp_store_release(ptep, new); + if (old == new) + return true; + else if (!kvm_pte_valid(old))
(nit: clearer to drop the 'else' part here)
data->mm_ops->get_page(ptep);
Ok, so this works because new is always valid. LGTM. Will _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel