Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 7 Mar 2024 13:48:55 +1300 | Subject | Re: [PATCH 13/16] KVM: x86/mmu: Handle no-slot faults at the beginning of kvm_faultin_pfn() | From | "Huang, Kai" <> |
| |
On 28/02/2024 3:41 pm, Sean Christopherson wrote: > Handle the "no memslot" case at the beginning of kvm_faultin_pfn(), just > after the private versus shared check, so that there's no need to > repeatedly query whether or not a slot exists. This also makes it more > obvious that, except for private vs. shared attributes, the process of > faulting in a pfn simply doesn't apply to gfns without a slot. > > Opportunistically stuff @fault's metadata in kvm_handle_noslot_fault() so > that it doesn't need to be duplicated in all paths that invoke > kvm_handle_noslot_fault(), and to minimize the probability of not stuffing > the right fields. > > Leave the existing handle behind, but convert it to a WARN, to guard > against __kvm_faultin_pfn() unexpectedly nullifying fault->slot. > > Cc: David Matlack <dmatlack@google.com> > Signed-off-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Kai Huang <kai.huang@intel.com>
One nit ...
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu_internal.h > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu_internal.h > @@ -235,7 +235,7 @@ struct kvm_page_fault { > /* The memslot containing gfn. May be NULL. */ > struct kvm_memory_slot *slot; > > - /* Outputs of kvm_faultin_pfn. */ > + /* Outputs of kvm_faultin_pfn. */ > unsigned long mmu_seq; > kvm_pfn_t pfn; > hva_t hva;
.. how about get rid of this non-related fix?
Yeah it's annoying but do in a separate patch?
| |