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;
Date:   Thu, 24 Jun 2021 19:57:57 +1000
From:   Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] KVM: mmu: also return page from gfn_to_pfn
To:     Aleksandar Markovic <aleksandar.qemu.devel@gmail.com>,
        Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@kernel.org>,
        Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
        Paul Mackerras <paulus@ozlabs.org>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
        David Stevens <stevensd@chromium.org>,
        Zhenyu Wang <zhenyuw@linux.intel.com>,
        Zhi Wang <zhi.a.wang@intel.com>
Cc:     Alexandru Elisei <alexandru.elisei@arm.com>,
        dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org,
        intel-gvt-dev@lists.freedesktop.org,
        James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
        Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>,
        Joerg Roedel <joro@8bytes.org>, kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu,
        kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
        Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
        Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
        Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>,
        Wanpeng Li <wanpengli@tencent.com>,
        Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
References: <20210624035749.4054934-1-stevensd@google.com>
        <20210624035749.4054934-3-stevensd@google.com>
        <1624524331.zsin3qejl9.astroid@bobo.none>
        <201b68a7-10ea-d656-0c1e-5511b1f22674@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <201b68a7-10ea-d656-0c1e-5511b1f22674@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <1624528342.s2ezcyp90x.astroid@bobo.none>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

Excerpts from Paolo Bonzini's message of June 24, 2021 7:42 pm:
> On 24/06/21 10:52, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
>>> For now, wrap all calls to gfn_to_pfn functions in the new helper
>>> function. Callers which don't need the page struct will be updated in
>>> follow-up patches.
>> Hmm. You mean callers that do need the page will be updated? Normally
>> if there will be leftover users that don't need the struct page then
>> you would go the other way and keep the old call the same, and add a new
>> one (gfn_to_pfn_page) just for those that need it.
>=20
> Needing kvm_pfn_page_unwrap is a sign that something might be buggy, so=20
> it's a good idea to move the short name to the common case and the ugly=20
> kvm_pfn_page_unwrap(gfn_to_pfn(...)) for the weird one.  In fact I'm not=20
> sure there should be any kvm_pfn_page_unwrap in the end.

If all callers were updated that is one thing, but from the changelog
it sounds like that would not happen and there would be some gfn_to_pfn
users left over.

But yes in the end you would either need to make gfn_to_pfn never return
a page found via follow_pte, or change all callers to the new way. If=20
the plan is for the latter then I guess that's fine.

Thanks,
Nick