Re: [PATCH v2 00/12] KVM/X86: Introduce a new guest mapping interface

2018-07-11 Thread Paolo Bonzini
On 10/07/2018 14:06, Raslan, KarimAllah wrote:
> On Mon, 2018-04-16 at 13:10 +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> On 15/04/2018 23:53, KarimAllah Ahmed wrote:
>>>
>>> Guest memory can either be directly managed by the kernel (i.e. have a 
>>> "struct
>>> page") or they can simply live outside kernel control (i.e. do not have a
>>> "struct page"). KVM mostly support these two modes, except in a few places
>>> where the code seems to assume that guest memory must have a "struct page".
>>>
>>> This patchset introduces a new mapping interface to map guest memory into 
>>> host
>>> kernel memory which also supports PFN-based memory (i.e. memory without 
>>> 'struct
>>> page'). It also converts all offending code to this interface or simply
>>> read/write directly from guest memory.
>>>
>>> As far as I can see all offending code is now fixed except the APIC-access 
>>> page
>>> which I will handle in a seperate patch.
>>
>> I assume the caching will also be a separate patch.
>>
>> It looks good except that I'd squash patches 4 and 9 together.  But I'd
>> like a second set of eyes to look at it.
> 
> BTW, Why did you want to squash these 2 patches specifically? They are 
> very unrelated to me. The only common thing is that they switch from 
> code that supports only "struct page" to code that supports PFN only
> but this is also common for all other patches.

Probably at the time I was thinking they both affect cmpxchg, but really
they are gpte and emulator respectively.  Looks like I have 12 more
patches on my review queue then! *ouch*

Paolo

>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Paolo
>>
> Amazon Development Center Germany GmbH
> Berlin - Dresden - Aachen
> main office: Krausenstr. 38, 10117 Berlin
> Geschaeftsfuehrer: Dr. Ralf Herbrich, Christian Schlaeger
> Ust-ID: DE289237879
> Eingetragen am Amtsgericht Charlottenburg HRB 149173 B
> 



Re: [PATCH v2 00/12] KVM/X86: Introduce a new guest mapping interface

2018-07-11 Thread Paolo Bonzini
On 10/07/2018 14:06, Raslan, KarimAllah wrote:
> On Mon, 2018-04-16 at 13:10 +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> On 15/04/2018 23:53, KarimAllah Ahmed wrote:
>>>
>>> Guest memory can either be directly managed by the kernel (i.e. have a 
>>> "struct
>>> page") or they can simply live outside kernel control (i.e. do not have a
>>> "struct page"). KVM mostly support these two modes, except in a few places
>>> where the code seems to assume that guest memory must have a "struct page".
>>>
>>> This patchset introduces a new mapping interface to map guest memory into 
>>> host
>>> kernel memory which also supports PFN-based memory (i.e. memory without 
>>> 'struct
>>> page'). It also converts all offending code to this interface or simply
>>> read/write directly from guest memory.
>>>
>>> As far as I can see all offending code is now fixed except the APIC-access 
>>> page
>>> which I will handle in a seperate patch.
>>
>> I assume the caching will also be a separate patch.
>>
>> It looks good except that I'd squash patches 4 and 9 together.  But I'd
>> like a second set of eyes to look at it.
> 
> BTW, Why did you want to squash these 2 patches specifically? They are 
> very unrelated to me. The only common thing is that they switch from 
> code that supports only "struct page" to code that supports PFN only
> but this is also common for all other patches.

Probably at the time I was thinking they both affect cmpxchg, but really
they are gpte and emulator respectively.  Looks like I have 12 more
patches on my review queue then! *ouch*

Paolo

>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Paolo
>>
> Amazon Development Center Germany GmbH
> Berlin - Dresden - Aachen
> main office: Krausenstr. 38, 10117 Berlin
> Geschaeftsfuehrer: Dr. Ralf Herbrich, Christian Schlaeger
> Ust-ID: DE289237879
> Eingetragen am Amtsgericht Charlottenburg HRB 149173 B
> 



Re: [PATCH v2 00/12] KVM/X86: Introduce a new guest mapping interface

2018-07-10 Thread Raslan, KarimAllah
On Mon, 2018-04-16 at 13:10 +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 15/04/2018 23:53, KarimAllah Ahmed wrote:
> > 
> > Guest memory can either be directly managed by the kernel (i.e. have a 
> > "struct
> > page") or they can simply live outside kernel control (i.e. do not have a
> > "struct page"). KVM mostly support these two modes, except in a few places
> > where the code seems to assume that guest memory must have a "struct page".
> > 
> > This patchset introduces a new mapping interface to map guest memory into 
> > host
> > kernel memory which also supports PFN-based memory (i.e. memory without 
> > 'struct
> > page'). It also converts all offending code to this interface or simply
> > read/write directly from guest memory.
> > 
> > As far as I can see all offending code is now fixed except the APIC-access 
> > page
> > which I will handle in a seperate patch.
> 
> I assume the caching will also be a separate patch.
> 
> It looks good except that I'd squash patches 4 and 9 together.  But I'd
> like a second set of eyes to look at it.

BTW, Why did you want to squash these 2 patches specifically? They are 
very unrelated to me. The only common thing is that they switch from 
code that supports only "struct page" to code that supports PFN only
but this is also common for all other patches.

> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Paolo
> 
Amazon Development Center Germany GmbH
Berlin - Dresden - Aachen
main office: Krausenstr. 38, 10117 Berlin
Geschaeftsfuehrer: Dr. Ralf Herbrich, Christian Schlaeger
Ust-ID: DE289237879
Eingetragen am Amtsgericht Charlottenburg HRB 149173 B


Re: [PATCH v2 00/12] KVM/X86: Introduce a new guest mapping interface

2018-07-10 Thread Raslan, KarimAllah
On Mon, 2018-04-16 at 13:10 +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 15/04/2018 23:53, KarimAllah Ahmed wrote:
> > 
> > Guest memory can either be directly managed by the kernel (i.e. have a 
> > "struct
> > page") or they can simply live outside kernel control (i.e. do not have a
> > "struct page"). KVM mostly support these two modes, except in a few places
> > where the code seems to assume that guest memory must have a "struct page".
> > 
> > This patchset introduces a new mapping interface to map guest memory into 
> > host
> > kernel memory which also supports PFN-based memory (i.e. memory without 
> > 'struct
> > page'). It also converts all offending code to this interface or simply
> > read/write directly from guest memory.
> > 
> > As far as I can see all offending code is now fixed except the APIC-access 
> > page
> > which I will handle in a seperate patch.
> 
> I assume the caching will also be a separate patch.
> 
> It looks good except that I'd squash patches 4 and 9 together.  But I'd
> like a second set of eyes to look at it.

BTW, Why did you want to squash these 2 patches specifically? They are 
very unrelated to me. The only common thing is that they switch from 
code that supports only "struct page" to code that supports PFN only
but this is also common for all other patches.

> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Paolo
> 
Amazon Development Center Germany GmbH
Berlin - Dresden - Aachen
main office: Krausenstr. 38, 10117 Berlin
Geschaeftsfuehrer: Dr. Ralf Herbrich, Christian Schlaeger
Ust-ID: DE289237879
Eingetragen am Amtsgericht Charlottenburg HRB 149173 B


Re: [PATCH v2 00/12] KVM/X86: Introduce a new guest mapping interface

2018-05-22 Thread Raslan, KarimAllah
On Tue, 2018-05-15 at 12:06 -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 02:27:13PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> > 
> > On 16/04/2018 14:09, Raslan, KarimAllah wrote:
> > > 
> > > > 
> > > > I assume the caching will also be a separate patch.
> > > Yup, do you want me to include it in this one? I already have it, I
> > > just thought that I get those bits out first.
> > 
> > It's the same for me.
> > 
> > Paolo
> > 
> > > 
> > > > 
> > > > It looks good except that I'd squash patches 4 and 9 together.
> > > Yup, makes sense. I should have squashed them when I removed the 
> > > lifecycle change!
> > > 
> > > Thanks for the review :)
> > > 
> > > > 
> > > > But I'd like a second set of eyes to look at it.
> 
> Did anybody else end up reviewing these patches? And would it make sense
> to repost a new version with the #4 and #9 squashed? Thanks.

No, no second review yet. I will squash and repost a new version.

> 
> > 
> > 
> 
Amazon Development Center Germany GmbH
Berlin - Dresden - Aachen
main office: Krausenstr. 38, 10117 Berlin
Geschaeftsfuehrer: Dr. Ralf Herbrich, Christian Schlaeger
Ust-ID: DE289237879
Eingetragen am Amtsgericht Charlottenburg HRB 149173 B


Re: [PATCH v2 00/12] KVM/X86: Introduce a new guest mapping interface

2018-05-22 Thread Raslan, KarimAllah
On Tue, 2018-05-15 at 12:06 -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 02:27:13PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> > 
> > On 16/04/2018 14:09, Raslan, KarimAllah wrote:
> > > 
> > > > 
> > > > I assume the caching will also be a separate patch.
> > > Yup, do you want me to include it in this one? I already have it, I
> > > just thought that I get those bits out first.
> > 
> > It's the same for me.
> > 
> > Paolo
> > 
> > > 
> > > > 
> > > > It looks good except that I'd squash patches 4 and 9 together.
> > > Yup, makes sense. I should have squashed them when I removed the 
> > > lifecycle change!
> > > 
> > > Thanks for the review :)
> > > 
> > > > 
> > > > But I'd like a second set of eyes to look at it.
> 
> Did anybody else end up reviewing these patches? And would it make sense
> to repost a new version with the #4 and #9 squashed? Thanks.

No, no second review yet. I will squash and repost a new version.

> 
> > 
> > 
> 
Amazon Development Center Germany GmbH
Berlin - Dresden - Aachen
main office: Krausenstr. 38, 10117 Berlin
Geschaeftsfuehrer: Dr. Ralf Herbrich, Christian Schlaeger
Ust-ID: DE289237879
Eingetragen am Amtsgericht Charlottenburg HRB 149173 B


Re: [PATCH v2 00/12] KVM/X86: Introduce a new guest mapping interface

2018-05-15 Thread Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 02:27:13PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 16/04/2018 14:09, Raslan, KarimAllah wrote:
> >> I assume the caching will also be a separate patch.
> > Yup, do you want me to include it in this one? I already have it, I
> > just thought that I get those bits out first.
> 
> It's the same for me.
> 
> Paolo
> 
> >> It looks good except that I'd squash patches 4 and 9 together.
> > Yup, makes sense. I should have squashed them when I removed the 
> > lifecycle change!
> > 
> > Thanks for the review :)
> > 
> >> But I'd like a second set of eyes to look at it.

Did anybody else end up reviewing these patches? And would it make sense
to repost a new version with the #4 and #9 squashed? Thanks.

> 


Re: [PATCH v2 00/12] KVM/X86: Introduce a new guest mapping interface

2018-05-15 Thread Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 02:27:13PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 16/04/2018 14:09, Raslan, KarimAllah wrote:
> >> I assume the caching will also be a separate patch.
> > Yup, do you want me to include it in this one? I already have it, I
> > just thought that I get those bits out first.
> 
> It's the same for me.
> 
> Paolo
> 
> >> It looks good except that I'd squash patches 4 and 9 together.
> > Yup, makes sense. I should have squashed them when I removed the 
> > lifecycle change!
> > 
> > Thanks for the review :)
> > 
> >> But I'd like a second set of eyes to look at it.

Did anybody else end up reviewing these patches? And would it make sense
to repost a new version with the #4 and #9 squashed? Thanks.

> 


Re: [PATCH v2 00/12] KVM/X86: Introduce a new guest mapping interface

2018-04-16 Thread Paolo Bonzini
On 16/04/2018 14:09, Raslan, KarimAllah wrote:
>> I assume the caching will also be a separate patch.
> Yup, do you want me to include it in this one? I already have it, I
> just thought that I get those bits out first.

It's the same for me.

Paolo

>> It looks good except that I'd squash patches 4 and 9 together.
> Yup, makes sense. I should have squashed them when I removed the 
> lifecycle change!
> 
> Thanks for the review :)
> 
>> But I'd like a second set of eyes to look at it.



Re: [PATCH v2 00/12] KVM/X86: Introduce a new guest mapping interface

2018-04-16 Thread Paolo Bonzini
On 16/04/2018 14:09, Raslan, KarimAllah wrote:
>> I assume the caching will also be a separate patch.
> Yup, do you want me to include it in this one? I already have it, I
> just thought that I get those bits out first.

It's the same for me.

Paolo

>> It looks good except that I'd squash patches 4 and 9 together.
> Yup, makes sense. I should have squashed them when I removed the 
> lifecycle change!
> 
> Thanks for the review :)
> 
>> But I'd like a second set of eyes to look at it.



Re: [PATCH v2 00/12] KVM/X86: Introduce a new guest mapping interface

2018-04-16 Thread Raslan, KarimAllah
On Mon, 2018-04-16 at 13:10 +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 15/04/2018 23:53, KarimAllah Ahmed wrote:
> > 
> > Guest memory can either be directly managed by the kernel (i.e. have a 
> > "struct
> > page") or they can simply live outside kernel control (i.e. do not have a
> > "struct page"). KVM mostly support these two modes, except in a few places
> > where the code seems to assume that guest memory must have a "struct page".
> > 
> > This patchset introduces a new mapping interface to map guest memory into 
> > host
> > kernel memory which also supports PFN-based memory (i.e. memory without 
> > 'struct
> > page'). It also converts all offending code to this interface or simply
> > read/write directly from guest memory.
> > 
> > As far as I can see all offending code is now fixed except the APIC-access 
> > page
> > which I will handle in a seperate patch.
> 
> I assume the caching will also be a separate patch.

Yup, do you want me to include it in this one? I already have it, I
just thought that I get those bits out first.

> 
> It looks good except that I'd squash patches 4 and 9 together.

Yup, makes sense. I should have squashed them when I removed the 
lifecycle change!

Thanks for the review :)

> But I'd like a second set of eyes to look at it.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Paolo
> 
Amazon Development Center Germany GmbH
Berlin - Dresden - Aachen
main office: Krausenstr. 38, 10117 Berlin
Geschaeftsfuehrer: Dr. Ralf Herbrich, Christian Schlaeger
Ust-ID: DE289237879
Eingetragen am Amtsgericht Charlottenburg HRB 149173 B


Re: [PATCH v2 00/12] KVM/X86: Introduce a new guest mapping interface

2018-04-16 Thread Raslan, KarimAllah
On Mon, 2018-04-16 at 13:10 +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 15/04/2018 23:53, KarimAllah Ahmed wrote:
> > 
> > Guest memory can either be directly managed by the kernel (i.e. have a 
> > "struct
> > page") or they can simply live outside kernel control (i.e. do not have a
> > "struct page"). KVM mostly support these two modes, except in a few places
> > where the code seems to assume that guest memory must have a "struct page".
> > 
> > This patchset introduces a new mapping interface to map guest memory into 
> > host
> > kernel memory which also supports PFN-based memory (i.e. memory without 
> > 'struct
> > page'). It also converts all offending code to this interface or simply
> > read/write directly from guest memory.
> > 
> > As far as I can see all offending code is now fixed except the APIC-access 
> > page
> > which I will handle in a seperate patch.
> 
> I assume the caching will also be a separate patch.

Yup, do you want me to include it in this one? I already have it, I
just thought that I get those bits out first.

> 
> It looks good except that I'd squash patches 4 and 9 together.

Yup, makes sense. I should have squashed them when I removed the 
lifecycle change!

Thanks for the review :)

> But I'd like a second set of eyes to look at it.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Paolo
> 
Amazon Development Center Germany GmbH
Berlin - Dresden - Aachen
main office: Krausenstr. 38, 10117 Berlin
Geschaeftsfuehrer: Dr. Ralf Herbrich, Christian Schlaeger
Ust-ID: DE289237879
Eingetragen am Amtsgericht Charlottenburg HRB 149173 B


Re: [PATCH v2 00/12] KVM/X86: Introduce a new guest mapping interface

2018-04-16 Thread Paolo Bonzini
On 15/04/2018 23:53, KarimAllah Ahmed wrote:
> Guest memory can either be directly managed by the kernel (i.e. have a "struct
> page") or they can simply live outside kernel control (i.e. do not have a
> "struct page"). KVM mostly support these two modes, except in a few places
> where the code seems to assume that guest memory must have a "struct page".
> 
> This patchset introduces a new mapping interface to map guest memory into host
> kernel memory which also supports PFN-based memory (i.e. memory without 
> 'struct
> page'). It also converts all offending code to this interface or simply
> read/write directly from guest memory.
> 
> As far as I can see all offending code is now fixed except the APIC-access 
> page
> which I will handle in a seperate patch.

I assume the caching will also be a separate patch.

It looks good except that I'd squash patches 4 and 9 together.  But I'd
like a second set of eyes to look at it.

Thanks,

Paolo


Re: [PATCH v2 00/12] KVM/X86: Introduce a new guest mapping interface

2018-04-16 Thread Paolo Bonzini
On 15/04/2018 23:53, KarimAllah Ahmed wrote:
> Guest memory can either be directly managed by the kernel (i.e. have a "struct
> page") or they can simply live outside kernel control (i.e. do not have a
> "struct page"). KVM mostly support these two modes, except in a few places
> where the code seems to assume that guest memory must have a "struct page".
> 
> This patchset introduces a new mapping interface to map guest memory into host
> kernel memory which also supports PFN-based memory (i.e. memory without 
> 'struct
> page'). It also converts all offending code to this interface or simply
> read/write directly from guest memory.
> 
> As far as I can see all offending code is now fixed except the APIC-access 
> page
> which I will handle in a seperate patch.

I assume the caching will also be a separate patch.

It looks good except that I'd squash patches 4 and 9 together.  But I'd
like a second set of eyes to look at it.

Thanks,

Paolo