Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.38 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.38;
Date:   Tue, 31 Oct 2023 16:40:53 -0700
In-Reply-To: <20231002095740.1472907-5-paul@xen.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
References: <20231002095740.1472907-1-paul@xen.org> <20231002095740.1472907-5-paul@xen.org>
Message-ID: <ZUGQhfH3HE-y6_5C@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 04/11] KVM: pfncache: base offset check on khva rather
 than gpa
From:   Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
To:     Paul Durrant <paul@xen.org>
Cc:     kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Paul Durrant <pdurrant@amazon.com>,
        David Woodhouse <dwmw@amazon.co.uk>,
        David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Oct 02, 2023, Paul Durrant wrote:
> From: Paul Durrant <pdurrant@amazon.com>
> 
> After a subsequent patch, the gpa may not always be set whereas khva will
> (as long as the cache valid flag is also set).

This holds true only because there are no users of KVM_GUEST_USES_PFN, and
because hva_to_pfn_retry() rather oddly adds the offset to a NULL khva.

I think it's time to admit using this to map PFNs into the guest is a bad idea
and rip out KVM_GUEST_USES_PFN before fully relying on khva.

https://lore.kernel.org/all/ZQiR8IpqOZrOpzHC@google.com