Re: [Qemu-devel] [patch v4 07/16] memory: make mmio dispatch able to be out of biglock

[Avi Kivity]

On 10/23/2012 02:12 PM, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> On 2012-10-22 11:23, Liu Ping Fan wrote:
>> Without biglock, we try to protect the mr by increase refcnt.
>> If we can inc refcnt, go backward and resort to biglock.
>> 
>> Another point is memory radix-tree can be flushed by another
>> thread, so we should get the copy of terminal mr to survive
>> from such issue.
>> 
>> +
>>  void cpu_physical_memory_rw(target_phys_addr_t addr, uint8_t *buf,
>>                              int len, int is_write)
>>  {
>> @@ -3413,14 +3489,28 @@ void cpu_physical_memory_rw(target_phys_addr_t addr, 
>> uint8_t *buf,
>>      uint8_t *ptr;
>>      uint32_t val;
>>      target_phys_addr_t page;
>> -    MemoryRegionSection *section;
>> +    MemoryRegionSection *section, obj_mrs;
>> +    int safe_ref;
>>  
>>      while (len > 0) {
>>          page = addr & TARGET_PAGE_MASK;
>>          l = (page + TARGET_PAGE_SIZE) - addr;
>>          if (l > len)
>>              l = len;
>> -        section = phys_page_find(page >> TARGET_PAGE_BITS);
>> +        qemu_mutex_lock(&mem_map_lock);
>> +        safe_ref = phys_page_lookup(page, &obj_mrs);
>> +        qemu_mutex_unlock(&mem_map_lock);
>> +        if (safe_ref == 0) {
>> +            qemu_mutex_lock_iothread();
>> +            qemu_mutex_lock(&mem_map_lock);
>> +            /* At the 2nd try, mem map can change, so need to judge it 
>> again */
>> +            safe_ref = phys_page_lookup(page, &obj_mrs);
>> +            qemu_mutex_unlock(&mem_map_lock);
>> +            if (safe_ref > 0) {
>> +                qemu_mutex_unlock_iothread();
>> +            }
>> +        }
>> +        section = &obj_mrs;
>>  
>>          if (is_write) {
>>              if (!memory_region_is_ram(section->mr)) {
>> @@ -3491,10 +3581,16 @@ void cpu_physical_memory_rw(target_phys_addr_t addr, 
>> uint8_t *buf,
>>                  qemu_put_ram_ptr(ptr);
>>              }
>>          }
>> +
>> +        memory_region_section_unref(&obj_mrs);
> 
> The mapping cannot change from not-referenced to reference-counted while
> we were dispatching? I mean the case where we found not ref callback on
> entry and took the big lock, but now there is an unref callback.

We drop the big lock in that case, so we end up in the same situation.

> 
>>          len -= l;
>>          buf += l;
>>          addr += l;
>> +        if (safe_ref == 0) {
>> +            qemu_mutex_unlock_iothread();
>> +        }
>>      }
>> +
>>  }
>>  
>>  /* used for ROM loading : can write in RAM and ROM */
>> @@ -3504,14 +3600,18 @@ void 
>> cpu_physical_memory_write_rom(target_phys_addr_t addr,
>>      int l;
>>      uint8_t *ptr;
>>      target_phys_addr_t page;
>> -    MemoryRegionSection *section;
>> +    MemoryRegionSection *section, mr_obj;
>>  
>>      while (len > 0) {
>>          page = addr & TARGET_PAGE_MASK;
>>          l = (page + TARGET_PAGE_SIZE) - addr;
>>          if (l > len)
>>              l = len;
>> -        section = phys_page_find(page >> TARGET_PAGE_BITS);
>> +
>> +        qemu_mutex_lock(&mem_map_lock);
>> +        phys_page_lookup(page, &mr_obj);
>> +        qemu_mutex_unlock(&mem_map_lock);
>> +        section = &mr_obj;
> 
> But here we don't care about the return code of phys_page_lookup and all
> related topics? Because we assume the BQL is held? Reminds me that we
> will need some support for assert(qemu_mutex_is_locked(&lock)).

I guess it's better to drop that assumption than to have asymmetric APIs.

>>  
>> @@ -4239,9 +4345,12 @@ bool virtio_is_big_endian(void)
>>  #ifndef CONFIG_USER_ONLY
>>  bool cpu_physical_memory_is_io(target_phys_addr_t phys_addr)
>>  {
>> -    MemoryRegionSection *section;
>> +    MemoryRegionSection *section, mr_obj;
>>  
>> -    section = phys_page_find(phys_addr >> TARGET_PAGE_BITS);
>> +    qemu_mutex_lock(&mem_map_lock);
>> +    phys_page_lookup(phys_addr, &mr_obj);
>> +    qemu_mutex_unlock(&mem_map_lock);
>> +    section = &mr_obj;
> 
> Err, no unref needed here?

Need _ref in the name to remind reviewers that it leaves the refcount
unbalanced.

-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function