On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 01:14:32PM -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote: > On Tue, Jun 07, 2011 at 09:00:30PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote: > > If the page fault is caused by mmio, we can cache the mmio info, later, we > > do > > not need to walk guest page table and quickly know it is a mmio fault while > > we > > emulate the mmio instruction > > > > Signed-off-by: Xiao Guangrong <[email protected]> > > --- > > arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h | 5 +++ > > arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c | 21 +++++---------- > > arch/x86/kvm/mmu.h | 23 +++++++++++++++++ > > arch/x86/kvm/paging_tmpl.h | 21 ++++++++++----- > > arch/x86/kvm/x86.c | 52 > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------- > > arch/x86/kvm/x86.h | 36 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > 6 files changed, 126 insertions(+), 32 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h > > b/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h > > index d167039..326af42 100644 > > --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h > > +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/kvm_host.h > > @@ -414,6 +414,11 @@ struct kvm_vcpu_arch { > > u64 mcg_ctl; > > u64 *mce_banks; > > > > + /* Cache MMIO info */ > > + u64 mmio_gva; > > + unsigned access; > > + gfn_t mmio_gfn; > > + > > /* used for guest single stepping over the given code position */ > > unsigned long singlestep_rip; > > > > Why you're not implementing the original idea to cache the MMIO > attribute of an address into the spte? > > That solution is wider reaching than a one-entry cache, and was proposed > to overcome large number of memslots. > > If the access pattern switches between different addresses this one > solution is doomed.
Nevermind, its later in the series. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
