[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[PATCH v3 13/16] memory: Clarify mapping requirements for RamDiscardMana
From: |
David Hildenbrand |
Subject: |
[PATCH v3 13/16] memory: Clarify mapping requirements for RamDiscardManager |
Date: |
Fri, 8 Sep 2023 16:21:33 +0200 |
We really only care about the RAM memory region not being mapped into
an address space yet as long as we're still setting up the
RamDiscardManager. Once mapped into an address space, memory notifiers
would get notified about such a region and any attempts to modify the
RamDiscardManager would be wrong.
While "mapped into an address space" is easy to check for RAM regions that
are mapped directly (following the ->container links), it's harder to
check when such regions are mapped indirectly via aliases. For now, we can
only detect that a region is mapped through an alias (->mapped_via_alias),
but we don't have a handle on these aliases to follow all their ->container
links to test if they are eventually mapped into an address space.
So relax the assertion in memory_region_set_ram_discard_manager(),
remove the check in memory_region_get_ram_discard_manager() and clarify
the doc.
Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
---
include/exec/memory.h | 5 +++--
softmmu/memory.c | 4 ++--
2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/exec/memory.h b/include/exec/memory.h
index 68284428f8..5feb704585 100644
--- a/include/exec/memory.h
+++ b/include/exec/memory.h
@@ -593,8 +593,9 @@ typedef void (*ReplayRamDiscard)(MemoryRegionSection
*section, void *opaque);
* populated (consuming memory), to be used/accessed by the VM.
*
* A #RamDiscardManager can only be set for a RAM #MemoryRegion while the
- * #MemoryRegion isn't mapped yet; it cannot change while the #MemoryRegion is
- * mapped.
+ * #MemoryRegion isn't mapped into an address space yet (either directly
+ * or via an alias); it cannot change while the #MemoryRegion is
+ * mapped into an address space.
*
* The #RamDiscardManager is intended to be used by technologies that are
* incompatible with discarding of RAM (e.g., VFIO, which may pin all
diff --git a/softmmu/memory.c b/softmmu/memory.c
index 7d9494ce70..c1e8aa133f 100644
--- a/softmmu/memory.c
+++ b/softmmu/memory.c
@@ -2081,7 +2081,7 @@ int memory_region_iommu_num_indexes(IOMMUMemoryRegion
*iommu_mr)
RamDiscardManager *memory_region_get_ram_discard_manager(MemoryRegion *mr)
{
- if (!memory_region_is_mapped(mr) || !memory_region_is_ram(mr)) {
+ if (!memory_region_is_ram(mr)) {
return NULL;
}
return mr->rdm;
@@ -2090,7 +2090,7 @@ RamDiscardManager
*memory_region_get_ram_discard_manager(MemoryRegion *mr)
void memory_region_set_ram_discard_manager(MemoryRegion *mr,
RamDiscardManager *rdm)
{
- g_assert(memory_region_is_ram(mr) && !memory_region_is_mapped(mr));
+ g_assert(memory_region_is_ram(mr));
g_assert(!rdm || !mr->rdm);
mr->rdm = rdm;
}
--
2.41.0
- Re: [PATCH v3 08/16] memory-device: Track required and actually used memslots in DeviceMemoryState, (continued)
- [PATCH v3 09/16] memory-device, vhost: Support memory devices that dynamically consume memslots, David Hildenbrand, 2023/09/08
- [PATCH v3 10/16] kvm: Add stub for kvm_get_max_memslots(), David Hildenbrand, 2023/09/08
- [PATCH v3 11/16] vhost: Add vhost_get_max_memslots(), David Hildenbrand, 2023/09/08
- [PATCH v3 12/16] memory-device, vhost: Support automatic decision on the number of memslots, David Hildenbrand, 2023/09/08
- [PATCH v3 13/16] memory: Clarify mapping requirements for RamDiscardManager,
David Hildenbrand <=
- [PATCH v3 14/16] virtio-mem: Expose device memory via multiple memslots if enabled, David Hildenbrand, 2023/09/08
- [PATCH v3 15/16] memory, vhost: Allow for marking memory device memory regions unmergeable, David Hildenbrand, 2023/09/08
- [PATCH v3 16/16] virtio-mem: Mark memslot alias memory regions unmergeable, David Hildenbrand, 2023/09/08
- Re: [PATCH v3 00/16] virtio-mem: Expose device memory through multiple memslots, David Hildenbrand, 2023/09/11