| Message ID | 20200410034150.24738.98143.stgit@localhost.localdomain (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | virtio-balloon: add support for free page reporting | expand |
On 10/04/20 05:41, Alexander Duyck wrote: > From: Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@linux.intel.com> > > According to the documentation in memory.h a ROM memory region will be > backed by RAM for reads, but is supposed to go through a callback for > writes. Currently we were not checking for the existence of the rom_device > flag when determining if we could perform a direct write or not. > > To correct that add a check to memory_region_is_direct so that if the > memory region has the rom_device flag set we will return false for all > checks where is_write is set. > > Signed-off-by: Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@linux.intel.com> > --- > include/exec/memory.h | 4 ++-- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/include/exec/memory.h b/include/exec/memory.h > index 1614d9a02c0c..e000bd2f97b2 100644 > --- a/include/exec/memory.h > +++ b/include/exec/memory.h > @@ -2351,8 +2351,8 @@ void address_space_write_cached_slow(MemoryRegionCache *cache, > static inline bool memory_access_is_direct(MemoryRegion *mr, bool is_write) > { > if (is_write) { > - return memory_region_is_ram(mr) && > - !mr->readonly && !memory_region_is_ram_device(mr); > + return memory_region_is_ram(mr) && !mr->readonly && > + !mr->rom_device && !memory_region_is_ram_device(mr); > } else { > return (memory_region_is_ram(mr) && !memory_region_is_ram_device(mr)) || > memory_region_is_romd(mr); > Good catch. I queued this up for 5.0. Thanks, Paolo
On Fri, Apr 10, 2020 at 3:50 AM Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> wrote: > > On 10/04/20 05:41, Alexander Duyck wrote: > > From: Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@linux.intel.com> > > > > According to the documentation in memory.h a ROM memory region will be > > backed by RAM for reads, but is supposed to go through a callback for > > writes. Currently we were not checking for the existence of the rom_device > > flag when determining if we could perform a direct write or not. > > > > To correct that add a check to memory_region_is_direct so that if the > > memory region has the rom_device flag set we will return false for all > > checks where is_write is set. > > > > Signed-off-by: Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@linux.intel.com> > > --- > > include/exec/memory.h | 4 ++-- > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/include/exec/memory.h b/include/exec/memory.h > > index 1614d9a02c0c..e000bd2f97b2 100644 > > --- a/include/exec/memory.h > > +++ b/include/exec/memory.h > > @@ -2351,8 +2351,8 @@ void address_space_write_cached_slow(MemoryRegionCache *cache, > > static inline bool memory_access_is_direct(MemoryRegion *mr, bool is_write) > > { > > if (is_write) { > > - return memory_region_is_ram(mr) && > > - !mr->readonly && !memory_region_is_ram_device(mr); > > + return memory_region_is_ram(mr) && !mr->readonly && > > + !mr->rom_device && !memory_region_is_ram_device(mr); > > } else { > > return (memory_region_is_ram(mr) && !memory_region_is_ram_device(mr)) || > > memory_region_is_romd(mr); > > > > Good catch. I queued this up for 5.0. > > Thanks, > > Paolo Thanks Paolo, It looks like you only pulled this patch correct? If so, David & Michael, do I need to resubmit the first 3 in this series or can those be pulled separately? Thanks. Alex
On 14.04.20 00:48, Alexander Duyck wrote: > On Fri, Apr 10, 2020 at 3:50 AM Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> wrote: >> >> On 10/04/20 05:41, Alexander Duyck wrote: >>> From: Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@linux.intel.com> >>> >>> According to the documentation in memory.h a ROM memory region will be >>> backed by RAM for reads, but is supposed to go through a callback for >>> writes. Currently we were not checking for the existence of the rom_device >>> flag when determining if we could perform a direct write or not. >>> >>> To correct that add a check to memory_region_is_direct so that if the >>> memory region has the rom_device flag set we will return false for all >>> checks where is_write is set. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@linux.intel.com> >>> --- >>> include/exec/memory.h | 4 ++-- >>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/include/exec/memory.h b/include/exec/memory.h >>> index 1614d9a02c0c..e000bd2f97b2 100644 >>> --- a/include/exec/memory.h >>> +++ b/include/exec/memory.h >>> @@ -2351,8 +2351,8 @@ void address_space_write_cached_slow(MemoryRegionCache *cache, >>> static inline bool memory_access_is_direct(MemoryRegion *mr, bool is_write) >>> { >>> if (is_write) { >>> - return memory_region_is_ram(mr) && >>> - !mr->readonly && !memory_region_is_ram_device(mr); >>> + return memory_region_is_ram(mr) && !mr->readonly && >>> + !mr->rom_device && !memory_region_is_ram_device(mr); >>> } else { >>> return (memory_region_is_ram(mr) && !memory_region_is_ram_device(mr)) || >>> memory_region_is_romd(mr); >>> >> >> Good catch. I queued this up for 5.0. >> >> Thanks, >> >> Paolo > > Thanks Paolo, > > It looks like you only pulled this patch correct? > > If so, David & Michael, do I need to resubmit the first 3 in this > series or can those be pulled separately? QEMU is currently in hard freeze. I'll have a final look over the patches. If nothing jumps at me (and nothing changed upstream in the meantime), Michael will queue them without a resend. Thanks!
diff --git a/include/exec/memory.h b/include/exec/memory.h index 1614d9a02c0c..e000bd2f97b2 100644 --- a/include/exec/memory.h +++ b/include/exec/memory.h @@ -2351,8 +2351,8 @@ void address_space_write_cached_slow(MemoryRegionCache *cache, static inline bool memory_access_is_direct(MemoryRegion *mr, bool is_write) { if (is_write) { - return memory_region_is_ram(mr) && - !mr->readonly && !memory_region_is_ram_device(mr); + return memory_region_is_ram(mr) && !mr->readonly && + !mr->rom_device && !memory_region_is_ram_device(mr); } else { return (memory_region_is_ram(mr) && !memory_region_is_ram_device(mr)) || memory_region_is_romd(mr);