Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20201119144146.1045202-1-daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
 <20201119144146.1045202-17-daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch> <cd56eb8a-fbec-e81f-9c14-d1256a193b68@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <cd56eb8a-fbec-e81f-9c14-d1256a193b68@redhat.com>
From:   Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
Date:   Fri, 20 Nov 2020 16:44:59 +0100
Message-ID: <CAKMK7uHDrPDcsWyMgFgjf0+hdebSUT4hX5hKR=CnTH=soLU-Kg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 16/17] RFC: kvm: pass kvm argument to follow_pfn callsites
To:     Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc:     DRI Development <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        KVM list <kvm@vger.kernel.org>, Linux MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        linux-samsung-soc <linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org>,
        "open list:DMA BUFFER SHARING FRAMEWORK" 
        <linux-media@vger.kernel.org>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@intel.com>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca>,
        Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com>,
        =?UTF-8?B?SsOpcsO0bWUgR2xpc3Nl?= <jglisse@redhat.com>,
        Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 4:33 PM Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On 19/11/20 15:41, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > Both Christoph Hellwig and Jason Gunthorpe suggested that usage of
> > follow_pfn by modules should be locked down more. To do so callers
> > need to be able to pass the mmu_notifier subscription corresponding
> > to the mm_struct to follow_pfn().
> >
> > This patch does the rote work of doing that in the kvm subsystem. In
> > most places this is solved by passing struct kvm * down the call
> > stacks as an additional parameter, since that contains the
> > mmu_notifier.
> >
> > Compile tested on all affected arch.
>
> It's a bit of a pity, it's making an API more complex (the point of
> gfn_to_pfn_memslot vs gfn_to_pfn is exactly that you don't need a
> "struct kvm*" and it's clear that you've already done the lookup into
> that struct kvm.

Yeah I noticed that, I think pushing the lookups down should work, but
that's a fairly large-scale change. I didn't want to do that for the
RFC since it would distract from the actual change/goal.
-Daniel

> But it's not a big deal, and the rationale at least makes sense.  So,
>
> Acked-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
>
> Paolo


-- 
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch