|
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] RE: [PATCH v1 03/13] xen/arm: allocate static shared memory to dom_shared
On Fri, 18 Mar 2022, Penny Zheng wrote:
> > On Fri, 11 Mar 2022, Penny Zheng wrote:
> > > From: Penny Zheng <penny.zheng@xxxxxxx>
> > >
> > > This commit introduces process_shm to cope with static shared memory
> > > in domain construction.
> > >
> > > This commit only considers allocating static shared memory to
> > > dom_shared when owner domain is not explicitly defined in device tree,
> > > the other scenario will be covered in the following patches.
> > >
> > > Static shared memory could reuse acquire_static_memory_bank() to
> > > acquire and allocate static memory.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Penny Zheng <penny.zheng@xxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > > xen/arch/arm/domain_build.c | 116
> > > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> > > 1 file changed, 115 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/xen/arch/arm/domain_build.c b/xen/arch/arm/domain_build.c
> > > index 8be01678de..6e6349caac 100644
> > > --- a/xen/arch/arm/domain_build.c
> > > +++ b/xen/arch/arm/domain_build.c
> > > @@ -527,7 +527,8 @@ static mfn_t __init
> > acquire_static_memory_bank(struct domain *d,
> > > mfn_t smfn;
> > > int res;
> > >
> > > - device_tree_get_reg(cell, addr_cells, size_cells, pbase, psize);
> > > + if ( cell )
> > > + device_tree_get_reg(cell, addr_cells, size_cells, pbase,
> > > + psize);
> >
> > Why this change?
> >
>
> This helper is also used for acquiring static memory as guest RAM for
> statically configured
> domain.
>
> And since we are reusing it for static shared memory, but try to avoid
> parsing the property
> here, the "xen,static-shm" property getting parsed in different ways in
> process_shm.
> So this change is needed here.
>
> And I think I need to add in-code comment to explain. ;)
>
> >
> > > ASSERT(IS_ALIGNED(*pbase, PAGE_SIZE) && IS_ALIGNED(*psize,
> > PAGE_SIZE));
> > > if ( PFN_DOWN(*psize) > UINT_MAX )
> > > {
> > > @@ -751,6 +752,113 @@ static void __init assign_static_memory_11(struct
> > domain *d,
> > > panic("Failed to assign requested static memory for direct-map
> > domain %pd.",
> > > d);
> > > }
> > > +
> > > +#ifdef CONFIG_STATIC_SHM
> > > +static __initdata DECLARE_BITMAP(shm_mask, NR_MEM_BANKS);
> > > +
> > > +static mfn_t __init acquire_shared_memory_bank(struct domain *d,
> > > + u32 addr_cells, u32
> > > size_cells,
> > > + paddr_t *pbase,
> > > +paddr_t *psize) {
> > > + /*
> > > + * Pages of statically shared memory shall be included
> > > + * in domain_tot_pages().
> > > + */
> > > + d->max_pages += PFN_DOWN(*psize);
> > > +
> > > + return acquire_static_memory_bank(d, NULL, addr_cells, size_cells,
> > > + pbase, psize);
> > > +
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > +static int __init allocate_shared_memory(struct domain *d,
> > > + u32 addr_cells, u32 size_cells,
> > > + paddr_t pbase, paddr_t psize,
> > > + paddr_t gbase) {
> > > + mfn_t smfn;
> > > + int ret = 0;
> > > +
> > > + printk(XENLOG_INFO "Allocate static shared memory
> > BANK %#"PRIpaddr"-%#"PRIpaddr"\n",
> > > + pbase, pbase + psize);
> > > +
> > > + smfn = acquire_shared_memory_bank(d, addr_cells, size_cells, &pbase,
> > > + &psize);
> > > + if ( mfn_eq(smfn, INVALID_MFN) )
> > > + return -EINVAL;
> > > +
> > > + ret = guest_physmap_add_pages(d, gaddr_to_gfn(gbase), smfn,
> > PFN_DOWN(psize));
> > > + if ( ret )
> > > + {
> > > + dprintk(XENLOG_ERR, "Failed to map shared memory to %pd.\n", d);
> > > + return ret;
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + return ret;
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > +static int __init process_shm(struct domain *d,
> > > + const struct dt_device_node *node) {
> > > + struct dt_device_node *shm_node;
> > > + int ret = 0;
> > > + const struct dt_property *prop;
> > > + const __be32 *cells;
> > > + u32 shm_id;
> > > + u32 addr_cells, size_cells;
> > > + paddr_t gbase, pbase, psize;
> > > +
> > > + dt_for_each_child_node(node, shm_node)
> > > + {
> > > + if ( !dt_device_is_compatible(shm_node,
> > > "xen,domain-shared-memory-
> > v1") )
> > > + continue;
> > > +
> > > + if ( !dt_property_read_u32(shm_node, "xen,shm-id", &shm_id) )
> > > + {
> > > + printk("Shared memory node does not provide \"xen,shm-id\"
> > property.\n");
> > > + return -ENOENT;
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + addr_cells = dt_n_addr_cells(shm_node);
> > > + size_cells = dt_n_size_cells(shm_node);
> > > + prop = dt_find_property(shm_node, "xen,shared-mem", NULL);
> > > + if ( !prop )
> > > + {
> > > + printk("Shared memory node does not provide
> > > \"xen,shared-mem\"
> > property.\n");
> > > + return -ENOENT;
> > > + }
> > > + cells = (const __be32 *)prop->value;
> > > + /* xen,shared-mem = <pbase, psize, gbase>; */
> > > + device_tree_get_reg(&cells, addr_cells, size_cells, &pbase,
> > > &psize);
> > > + ASSERT(IS_ALIGNED(pbase, PAGE_SIZE) && IS_ALIGNED(psize,
> > PAGE_SIZE));
> > > + gbase = dt_read_number(cells, addr_cells);
> > > +
> > > + /* TODO: Consider owner domain is not the default dom_shared. */
> > > + /*
> > > + * Per shared memory region could be shared between multiple
> > domains.
> > > + * In case re-allocating the same shared memory region, we use
> > > bitmask
> > > + * shm_mask to record whether this shared memory region has ever
> > been
> > > + * allocated already.
> > > + */
> > > + if ( !test_bit(shm_id, shm_mask) )
> > > + {
> > > + /*
> > > + * Allocate statically shared pages to the default
> > > dom_shared.
> > > + * Set up P2M, and dom_shared is a direct-map domain,
> > > + * so GFN == PFN.
> > > + */
> > > + ret = allocate_shared_memory(dom_shared, addr_cells,
> > > size_cells,
> > > + pbase, psize, pbase);
> > ^gbase
> >
> > The last parameter should be gbase instead of pbase?
> >
>
> Yes, and since dom_shared is a direct-map domain, GFN == PFN, so pbase should
> be
> ok here. I mentioned it on comments.
>
> And Why I make dom_shared direct-map domain is that in this way we don't need
> to decode
> owner GFN when doing foreign memory mapping for borrower domain.
>
> >
> > Reading this patch is not clear that only the "owner" code path is
> > implemented here. The "borrower" code path is implemented later and
> > missing in this patch. I think it would be good to clarify that in the
> > commit
> > message.
> >
> > Under this light, allocate_shared_memory is supposed to be only called for
> > the
> > owner. I think we should probably mention that in the in-code comment too.
> >
>
> Yes, only owner domain could allocate memory, I'll add it to in-code comment.
>
> > I don't think we need to define a second copy of shm_mask. Can we reuse the
> > one in bootfdt.c?
> >
>
> Yes, maybe I should reuse than reintroduce. And before using the bitmap here,
> I need to clear it totally to clean away all the stale info from bootfdt.c.
>
> > Or we could get rid of shm_mask entirely here if we check whether the pages
> > were already allocated in the owner p2m.
> >
> >
>
> Hmm, that means that we need to do the page walk each time? That's kinds of
> time-consuming, or am I missing some convenient way to check?
No page walk. I think it should be possible with:
- mfn_to_page
- page_get_owner
both of them are direct access. Assuming that the page owner is set
correctly.
|
 |
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |