Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20230605004334.1930091-1-mizhang@google.com> <CALMp9eSQgcKd=SN4q2QRYbveKoayKzuYEQPM0Xu+FgQ_Mja8-g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAL715WJowYL=W40SWmtPoz1F9WVBFDG7TQwbsV2Bwf9-cS77=Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <ZH4ofuj0qvKNO9Bz@google.com> <CAL715WKtsC=93Nqr7QJZxspWzF04_CLqN3FUxUaqTHWFRUrwBA@mail.gmail.com>
 <ZH+8GafaNLYPvTJI@google.com> <CAL715WJ1rHS9ORR2ttyAw+idqbaLnOhLveUhW8f4tB9o+ZsuiQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <ZH/PKMmWWgJQdcJQ@google.com>
In-Reply-To: <ZH/PKMmWWgJQdcJQ@google.com>
From:   Mingwei Zhang <mizhang@google.com>
Date:   Thu, 15 Jun 2023 16:57:33 -0700
Message-ID: <CAL715W+KSgNMk+kTt3=B-CgxTkToH6xmvHWvVmm3V+hir-jE=g@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] KVM: x86/mmu: Remove KVM MMU write lock when accessing indirect_shadow_pages
To:     Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
Cc:     Jim Mattson <jmattson@google.com>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ben Gardon <bgardon@google.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Jun 6, 2023 at 5:28=E2=80=AFPM Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.c=
om> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jun 06, 2023, Mingwei Zhang wrote:
> > > > Hmm. I agree with both points above, but below, the change seems to=
o
> > > > heavyweight. smp_wb() is a mfence(), i.e., serializing all
> > > > loads/stores before the instruction. Doing that for every shadow pa=
ge
> > > > creation and destruction seems a lot.
> > >
> > > No, the smp_*b() variants are just compiler barriers on x86.
> >
> > hmm, it is a "lock addl" now for smp_mb(). Check this: 450cbdd0125c
> > ("locking/x86: Use LOCK ADD for smp_mb() instead of MFENCE")
> >
> > So this means smp_mb() is not a free lunch and we need to be a little
> > bit careful.
>
> Oh, those sneaky macros.  x86 #defines __smp_mb(), not the outer helper. =
 I'll
> take a closer look before posting to see if there's a way to avoid the ru=
ntime
> barrier.

Checked again, I think using smp_wmb() and smp_rmb() should be fine as
those are just compiler barriers. We don't need a full barrier here.

Thanks.
-Mingwei