From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8CD55C83F17 for ; Fri, 18 Jul 2025 05:10:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 1B3386B00BE; Fri, 18 Jul 2025 01:10:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 163EB6B00BF; Fri, 18 Jul 2025 01:10:25 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 0528D6B00C0; Fri, 18 Jul 2025 01:10:24 -0400 (EDT) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0011.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.11]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E61236B00BE for ; Fri, 18 Jul 2025 01:10:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: from smtpin10.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay02.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6AB1712D444 for ; Fri, 18 Jul 2025 05:10:24 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 83676209568.10.64085F5 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [198.175.65.18]) by imf29.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D743120003 for ; Fri, 18 Jul 2025 05:10:21 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: imf29.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=intel.com header.s=Intel header.b=JfHHYYGG; spf=pass (imf29.hostedemail.com: domain of xiaoyao.li@intel.com designates 198.175.65.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=xiaoyao.li@intel.com; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=intel.com ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1752815422; h=from:from:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:dkim-signature; bh=AHYEWNrSpmFS/o49zvcw1E7tgkpRWCEII02Rk07Aqko=; b=ivo3vxucxZW7upsTGARy/7Cn9xQt9+Y05YUaN/wcfyaFCf27XBamGXJ3ougCZooAiuwJGs PNaipEsQo2vqhjBpqyPZCEMbRCGuZQDDqbD0vJWsYj14ZIeWkRdkWFSgwFRh1kNv6P4iTJ WRcneEyLQcr6woxbnRoJ0NYvq6vysNs= ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1752815422; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=CmjSRSEHW56yI3oGLlmfQR5cCHlzEVbBOzf8X9EPWFnEl+Ewj82N8/swfMQaN0CkISg3LU 5g/kjHTXs36d7zLSdfrjHXXOvuLrUS6uc0d+qEBU1t9jcMZIfRzHdks4NGhVYBaMQaQt7P BOfkBqkmvwv54RiFO3fBcIt85JmZ2XY= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf29.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=intel.com header.s=Intel header.b=JfHHYYGG; spf=pass (imf29.hostedemail.com: domain of xiaoyao.li@intel.com designates 198.175.65.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=xiaoyao.li@intel.com; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=intel.com DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1752815422; x=1784351422; h=message-id:date:mime-version:subject:to:cc:references: from:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=b7MC4xw+aWrHxKCyUGT5BCdoygo0xZwVblE3fF3ETJ4=; b=JfHHYYGGNUnzmLk5AemuQUuAgSPAcmkkLS3WSmUJTrq+s7Izyz8scLES UVDCCLhs5lcSHML5o2gBJJ39R6/tNsSOz/zciV/x6eC2OWJ19MgDuZfGX uCPFT1ytcu/B2HsEPBh98YnIgkDz+UHJ5T86bBWeVwKhz/A+NUSNGig+/ Aj0BoF/Lnyu3OzBhdzMr+1Ir/GSeWmRuD4AyCrCU5zdveL6KeNkLy6YdI CX1ZthXW2Tc3dUzrlk0EnKEnNJBBsqDeqkmctATd9XAkdfNLHrPgsHyBg KPM5FC+NliKIOJaQmdoTsO+wB7KQMSHctu8UNPMzNY/bY3jrGWTxF6Qxu Q==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: 5xNTwpqpSliXDpDyaXgorw== X-CSE-MsgGUID: 7xCkNOzFRNy6DVwpivO9Uw== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6800,10657,11495"; a="55228317" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.16,320,1744095600"; d="scan'208";a="55228317" Received: from fmviesa010.fm.intel.com ([10.60.135.150]) by orvoesa110.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 17 Jul 2025 22:10:21 -0700 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: a9b4WvSRTtaaMhuxuVj91Q== X-CSE-MsgGUID: TqPVZm1bRiiCBhRpewpQBA== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.16,320,1744095600"; d="scan'208";a="158671869" Received: from xiaoyaol-hp-g830.ccr.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.124.247.1]) ([10.124.247.1]) by fmviesa010-auth.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 17 Jul 2025 22:10:04 -0700 Message-ID: <8340ec70-1c44-47a7-8c48-89e175501e89@intel.com> Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2025 13:10:00 +0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH v15 11/21] KVM: x86/mmu: Allow NULL-able fault in kvm_max_private_mapping_level To: Fuad Tabba , kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, kvmarm@lists.linux.dev Cc: pbonzini@redhat.com, chenhuacai@kernel.org, mpe@ellerman.id.au, anup@brainfault.org, paul.walmsley@sifive.com, palmer@dabbelt.com, aou@eecs.berkeley.edu, seanjc@google.com, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk, brauner@kernel.org, willy@infradead.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, yilun.xu@intel.com, chao.p.peng@linux.intel.com, jarkko@kernel.org, amoorthy@google.com, dmatlack@google.com, isaku.yamahata@intel.com, mic@digikod.net, vbabka@suse.cz, vannapurve@google.com, ackerleytng@google.com, mail@maciej.szmigiero.name, david@redhat.com, michael.roth@amd.com, wei.w.wang@intel.com, liam.merwick@oracle.com, isaku.yamahata@gmail.com, kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com, suzuki.poulose@arm.com, steven.price@arm.com, quic_eberman@quicinc.com, quic_mnalajal@quicinc.com, quic_tsoni@quicinc.com, quic_svaddagi@quicinc.com, quic_cvanscha@quicinc.com, quic_pderrin@quicinc.com, quic_pheragu@quicinc.com, catalin.marinas@arm.com, james.morse@arm.com, yuzenghui@huawei.com, oliver.upton@linux.dev, maz@kernel.org, will@kernel.org, qperret@google.com, keirf@google.com, roypat@amazon.co.uk, shuah@kernel.org, hch@infradead.org, jgg@nvidia.com, rientjes@google.com, jhubbard@nvidia.com, fvdl@google.com, hughd@google.com, jthoughton@google.com, peterx@redhat.com, pankaj.gupta@amd.com, ira.weiny@intel.com References: <20250717162731.446579-1-tabba@google.com> <20250717162731.446579-12-tabba@google.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Xiaoyao Li In-Reply-To: <20250717162731.446579-12-tabba@google.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Rspamd-Server: rspam03 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 1D743120003 X-Stat-Signature: dtbkrp6ck8ggdqbbrgfg4s9wmus3b8j7 X-Rspam-User: X-HE-Tag: 1752815421-495644 X-HE-Meta: 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 uAssFHM/ dO1fhWKXtzFt7nYmFs0g1qbgvgTeJ1Z610qV5hBLJz91K5h6pF5oHw7inV0963uvgQ+MEZt1z6rls42tALWw6GVlQmZineiSwBr/tPwpd/WKgxWTwbgLkRQYckDJEzVhf9LjY0enQc4rkYnrVFL8QDTDlVqVwyr539bo4MnRu0whCk+2J52AGxItTy9jPjZDYiUSL8wdzc90ye2dbA9Ewwa3oBSozExvFOQHXqvAe9yAsUbz6XFrTuAXpC9BeO2MfYcQQiB3iwRf6cDIcEc7JOe/8ayOGeJdPnv/HO4Guf4WuFfAK8mRZpGlUE/ADbHDBPdnzpXAXIDydYeVtKzQhfgbOwMcZ1KOKe9TXesdeQXPouXo= X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: On 7/18/2025 12:27 AM, Fuad Tabba wrote: > From: Ackerley Tng > > Refactor kvm_max_private_mapping_level() to accept a NULL kvm_page_fault > pointer and rename it to kvm_gmem_max_mapping_level(). > > The max_mapping_level x86 operation (previously private_max_mapping_level) > is designed to potentially be called without an active page fault, for > instance, when kvm_mmu_max_mapping_level() is determining the maximum > mapping level for a gfn proactively. > > Allow NULL fault pointer: Modify kvm_max_private_mapping_level() to > safely handle a NULL fault argument. This aligns its interface with the > kvm_x86_ops.max_mapping_level operation it wraps, which can also be > called with NULL. are you sure of it? The patch 09 just added the check of fault->is_private for TDX and SEV. > Rename function to kvm_gmem_max_mapping_level(): This reinforces that > the function's scope is for guest_memfd-backed memory, which can be > either private or non-private, removing any remaining "private" > connotation from its name. > > Optimize max_level checks: Introduce a check in the caller to skip > querying for max_mapping_level if the current max_level is already > PG_LEVEL_4K, as no further reduction is possible. > > Acked-by: David Hildenbrand > Suggested-by: Sean Christoperson > Signed-off-by: Ackerley Tng > Signed-off-by: Fuad Tabba > --- > arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c | 16 +++++++--------- > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c > index bb925994cbc5..6bd28fda0fd3 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c > @@ -4467,17 +4467,13 @@ static inline u8 kvm_max_level_for_order(int order) > return PG_LEVEL_4K; > } > > -static u8 kvm_max_private_mapping_level(struct kvm *kvm, > - struct kvm_page_fault *fault, > - int gmem_order) > +static u8 kvm_gmem_max_mapping_level(struct kvm *kvm, int order, > + struct kvm_page_fault *fault) > { > - u8 max_level = fault->max_level; > u8 req_max_level; > + u8 max_level; > > - if (max_level == PG_LEVEL_4K) > - return PG_LEVEL_4K; > - > - max_level = min(kvm_max_level_for_order(gmem_order), max_level); > + max_level = kvm_max_level_for_order(order); > if (max_level == PG_LEVEL_4K) > return PG_LEVEL_4K; > > @@ -4513,7 +4509,9 @@ static int kvm_mmu_faultin_pfn_private(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, > } > > fault->map_writable = !(fault->slot->flags & KVM_MEM_READONLY); > - fault->max_level = kvm_max_private_mapping_level(vcpu->kvm, fault, max_order); > + if (fault->max_level >= PG_LEVEL_4K) > + fault->max_level = kvm_gmem_max_mapping_level(vcpu->kvm, > + max_order, fault); I cannot understand why this change is required. In what case will fault->max_level < PG_LEVEL_4K? > return RET_PF_CONTINUE; > }