On Fri, Jul 21, 2023, Isaku Yamahata wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 21, 2023 at 02:13:14PM +0800,
> Yuan Yao <yuan....@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > > +static int kvm_gmem_error_page(struct address_space *mapping, struct
> > > page *page)
> > > +{
> > > + struct list_head *gmem_list = &mapping->private_list;
> > > + struct kvm_memory_slot *slot;
> > > + struct kvm_gmem *gmem;
> > > + unsigned long index;
> > > + pgoff_t start, end;
> > > + gfn_t gfn;
> > > +
> > > + filemap_invalidate_lock_shared(mapping);
> > > +
> > > + start = page->index;
> > > + end = start + thp_nr_pages(page);
> > > +
> > > + list_for_each_entry(gmem, gmem_list, entry) {
> > > + xa_for_each_range(&gmem->bindings, index, slot, start, end - 1)
> > > {
> > > + for (gfn = start; gfn < end; gfn++) {
> >
> > Why the start end range used as gfn here ?
Math is hard? I almost always mess up these types of things, and then catch my
bugs via tests. But I don't have tests for this particular flow... Which
reminds me, we need tests for this :-) Hopefully error injection provides most
of what we need?
> > the page->index is offset of inode's page cache mapping and
> > gmem address space, IIUC, gfn calculation should follow same
> > way as kvm_gmem_invalidate_begin().
>
> Also instead of sending signal multiple times, we can utilize lsb argument.
As Vishal pointed out, this code shouldn't be sending signals in the first
place.
