qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Qemu-devel] [PATCH for-2.10] exec: Add lock parameter to qemu_ram_ptr_l


From: Anthony PERARD
Subject: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH for-2.10] exec: Add lock parameter to qemu_ram_ptr_length
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2017 17:53:26 +0100

Commit 04bf2526ce87f21b32c9acba1c5518708c243ad0 (exec: use
qemu_ram_ptr_length to access guest ram) start using qemu_ram_ptr_length
instead of qemu_map_ram_ptr, but when used with Xen, the behavior of
both function is different. They both call xen_map_cache, but one with
"lock", meaning the mapping of guest memory is never released
implicitly, and the second one without, which means, mapping can be
release later, when needed.

In the context of address_space_{read,write}_continue, the ptr to those
mapping should not be locked because it is used immediatly and never
used again.

The lock parameter make it explicit in which context qemu_ram_ptr_length
is called.

Signed-off-by: Anthony PERARD <address@hidden>
---
 exec.c | 12 ++++++------
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/exec.c b/exec.c
index 01ac21e3cd..63508cd35e 100644
--- a/exec.c
+++ b/exec.c
@@ -2203,7 +2203,7 @@ void *qemu_map_ram_ptr(RAMBlock *ram_block, ram_addr_t 
addr)
  * Called within RCU critical section.
  */
 static void *qemu_ram_ptr_length(RAMBlock *ram_block, ram_addr_t addr,
-                                 hwaddr *size)
+                                 hwaddr *size, bool lock)
 {
     RAMBlock *block = ram_block;
     if (*size == 0) {
@@ -2222,10 +2222,10 @@ static void *qemu_ram_ptr_length(RAMBlock *ram_block, 
ram_addr_t addr,
          * In that case just map the requested area.
          */
         if (block->offset == 0) {
-            return xen_map_cache(addr, *size, 1, true);
+            return xen_map_cache(addr, *size, lock ? 1 : 0, lock);
         }
 
-        block->host = xen_map_cache(block->offset, block->max_length, 1, true);
+        block->host = xen_map_cache(block->offset, block->max_length, 1, lock);
     }
 
     return ramblock_ptr(block, addr);
@@ -2947,7 +2947,7 @@ static MemTxResult 
address_space_write_continue(AddressSpace *as, hwaddr addr,
             }
         } else {
             /* RAM case */
-            ptr = qemu_ram_ptr_length(mr->ram_block, addr1, &l);
+            ptr = qemu_ram_ptr_length(mr->ram_block, addr1, &l, false);
             memcpy(ptr, buf, l);
             invalidate_and_set_dirty(mr, addr1, l);
         }
@@ -3038,7 +3038,7 @@ MemTxResult address_space_read_continue(AddressSpace *as, 
hwaddr addr,
             }
         } else {
             /* RAM case */
-            ptr = qemu_ram_ptr_length(mr->ram_block, addr1, &l);
+            ptr = qemu_ram_ptr_length(mr->ram_block, addr1, &l, false);
             memcpy(buf, ptr, l);
         }
 
@@ -3349,7 +3349,7 @@ void *address_space_map(AddressSpace *as,
 
     memory_region_ref(mr);
     *plen = address_space_extend_translation(as, addr, len, mr, xlat, l, 
is_write);
-    ptr = qemu_ram_ptr_length(mr->ram_block, xlat, plen);
+    ptr = qemu_ram_ptr_length(mr->ram_block, xlat, plen, true);
     rcu_read_unlock();
 
     return ptr;
-- 
Anthony PERARD




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]