[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH v3] gnttab: defer allocation of status frame tracking array



Hi Jan,

On 15/04/2021 10:41, Jan Beulich wrote:
This array can be large when many grant frames are permitted; avoid
allocating it when it's not going to be used anyway, by doing this only
in gnttab_populate_status_frames().

Given the controversy of the change, I would suggest to summarize why this approach is considered to be ok in the commit message.

Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
---
v3: Drop smp_wmb(). Re-base.
v2: Defer allocation to when a domain actually switches to the v2 grant
     API.

--- a/xen/common/grant_table.c
+++ b/xen/common/grant_table.c
@@ -1747,6 +1747,17 @@ gnttab_populate_status_frames(struct dom
      /* Make sure, prior version checks are architectural visible */
      block_speculation();
+ if ( gt->status == ZERO_BLOCK_PTR )
+    {
+        gt->status = xzalloc_array(grant_status_t *,
+                                   
grant_to_status_frames(gt->max_grant_frames));
+        if ( !gt->status )
+        {
+            gt->status = ZERO_BLOCK_PTR;
+            return -ENOMEM;
+        }
+    }
+
      for ( i = nr_status_frames(gt); i < req_status_frames; i++ )
      {
          if ( (gt->status[i] = alloc_xenheap_page()) == NULL )
@@ -1767,18 +1778,23 @@ status_alloc_failed:
          free_xenheap_page(gt->status[i]);
          gt->status[i] = NULL;
      }

NIT: can you add a newline here and...

+    if ( !nr_status_frames(gt) )
+    {
+        xfree(gt->status);
+        gt->status = ZERO_BLOCK_PTR;
+    }

... here for readability.

      return -ENOMEM;
  }
static int
  gnttab_unpopulate_status_frames(struct domain *d, struct grant_table *gt)
  {
-    unsigned int i;
+    unsigned int i, n = nr_status_frames(gt);
/* Make sure, prior version checks are architectural visible */
      block_speculation();
- for ( i = 0; i < nr_status_frames(gt); i++ )
+    for ( i = 0; i < n; i++ )
      {
          struct page_info *pg = virt_to_page(gt->status[i]);
          gfn_t gfn = gnttab_get_frame_gfn(gt, true, i);
@@ -1833,12 +1849,11 @@ gnttab_unpopulate_status_frames(struct d
          page_set_owner(pg, NULL);
      }
- for ( i = 0; i < nr_status_frames(gt); i++ )
-    {
-        free_xenheap_page(gt->status[i]);
-        gt->status[i] = NULL;
-    }
      gt->nr_status_frames = 0;
+    for ( i = 0; i < n; i++ )
+        free_xenheap_page(gt->status[i]);
+    xfree(gt->status);
+    gt->status = ZERO_BLOCK_PTR;
The new position of the for loop seems unrelated to the purpose of the patch. May I ask why this was done?

return 0;
  }
@@ -1969,11 +1984,11 @@ int grant_table_init(struct domain *d, i
      if ( gt->shared_raw == NULL )
          goto out;
- /* Status pages for grant table - for version 2 */
-    gt->status = xzalloc_array(grant_status_t *,
-                               grant_to_status_frames(gt->max_grant_frames));
-    if ( gt->status == NULL )
-        goto out;
+    /*
+     * Status page tracking array for v2 gets allocated on demand. But don't
+     * leave a NULL pointer there.
+     */
+    gt->status = ZERO_BLOCK_PTR;
grant_write_lock(gt); @@ -4047,11 +4062,12 @@ int gnttab_acquire_resource(
          if ( gt->gt_version != 2 )
              break;
+ rc = gnttab_get_status_frame_mfn(d, final_frame, &tmp);

NIT: It wasn't obvious to me why gnttab_get_status_frame_mfn() is moved before gt->status. May I suggest to add a in-code comment abouve the ordering?

+
          /* Check that void ** is a suitable representation for gt->status. */
          BUILD_BUG_ON(!__builtin_types_compatible_p(
                           typeof(gt->status), grant_status_t **));
          vaddrs = (void **)gt->status;
-        rc = gnttab_get_status_frame_mfn(d, final_frame, &tmp);
          break;
      }

Cheers,

--
Julien Grall



 


Rackspace

Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.