[v4 5/5] KVM: PPC: Book3S HV: migrate hot plugged memory

[Bharata B Rao]

On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 01:00:27AM -0700, Ram Pai wrote:
> From: Laurent Dufour <ldufour at linux.ibm.com>
> 
> When a memory slot is hot plugged to a SVM, PFNs associated with the
> GFNs in that slot must be migrated to secure-PFNs, aka device-PFNs.
> 
> Call kvmppc_uv_migrate_mem_slot() to accomplish this.
> Disable page-merge for all pages in the memory slot.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ram Pai <linuxram at us.ibm.com>
> [rearranged the code, and modified the commit log]
> Signed-off-by: Laurent Dufour <ldufour at linux.ibm.com>
> ---
>  arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm_book3s_uvmem.h | 10 ++++++++++
>  arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_hv.c                | 10 ++--------
>  arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_hv_uvmem.c          | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++
>  3 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm_book3s_uvmem.h b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm_book3s_uvmem.h
> index f229ab5..6f7da00 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm_book3s_uvmem.h
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/kvm_book3s_uvmem.h
> @@ -25,6 +25,9 @@ void kvmppc_uvmem_drop_pages(const struct kvm_memory_slot *free,
>  			     struct kvm *kvm, bool skip_page_out);
>  int kvmppc_uv_migrate_mem_slot(struct kvm *kvm,
>  			const struct kvm_memory_slot *memslot);
> +void kvmppc_memslot_create(struct kvm *kvm, const struct kvm_memory_slot *new);
> +void kvmppc_memslot_delete(struct kvm *kvm, const struct kvm_memory_slot *old);

The names look a bit generic, but these functions are specific
to secure guests. May be rename them to kvmppc_uvmem_memslot_[create/delele]?

> +
>  #else
>  static inline int kvmppc_uvmem_init(void)
>  {
> @@ -84,5 +87,12 @@ static inline int kvmppc_send_page_to_uv(struct kvm *kvm, unsigned long gfn)
>  static inline void
>  kvmppc_uvmem_drop_pages(const struct kvm_memory_slot *free,
>  			struct kvm *kvm, bool skip_page_out) { }
> +
> +static inline void  kvmppc_memslot_create(struct kvm *kvm,
> +		const struct kvm_memory_slot *new) { }
> +
> +static inline void  kvmppc_memslot_delete(struct kvm *kvm,
> +		const struct kvm_memory_slot *old) { }
> +
>  #endif /* CONFIG_PPC_UV */
>  #endif /* __ASM_KVM_BOOK3S_UVMEM_H__ */
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_hv.c b/arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_hv.c
> index d331b46..bf3be3b 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_hv.c
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_hv.c
> @@ -4515,16 +4515,10 @@ static void kvmppc_core_commit_memory_region_hv(struct kvm *kvm,
>  
>  	switch (change) {
>  	case KVM_MR_CREATE:
> -		if (kvmppc_uvmem_slot_init(kvm, new))
> -			return;
> -		uv_register_mem_slot(kvm->arch.lpid,
> -				     new->base_gfn << PAGE_SHIFT,
> -				     new->npages * PAGE_SIZE,
> -				     0, new->id);
> +		kvmppc_memslot_create(kvm, new);
>  		break;
>  	case KVM_MR_DELETE:
> -		uv_unregister_mem_slot(kvm->arch.lpid, old->id);
> -		kvmppc_uvmem_slot_free(kvm, old);
> +		kvmppc_memslot_delete(kvm, old);
>  		break;
>  	default:
>  		/* TODO: Handle KVM_MR_MOVE */
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_hv_uvmem.c b/arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_hv_uvmem.c
> index a206984..a2b4d25 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_hv_uvmem.c
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kvm/book3s_hv_uvmem.c
> @@ -1089,6 +1089,28 @@ int kvmppc_send_page_to_uv(struct kvm *kvm, unsigned long gfn)
>  	return (ret == U_SUCCESS) ? RESUME_GUEST : -EFAULT;
>  }
>  
> +void kvmppc_memslot_create(struct kvm *kvm, const struct kvm_memory_slot *new)
> +{
> +	if (kvmppc_uvmem_slot_init(kvm, new))
> +		return;
> +
> +	if (kvmppc_memslot_page_merge(kvm, new, false))
> +		return;
> +
> +	if (uv_register_mem_slot(kvm->arch.lpid, new->base_gfn << PAGE_SHIFT,
> +			new->npages * PAGE_SIZE, 0, new->id))
> +		return;
> +
> +	kvmppc_uv_migrate_mem_slot(kvm, new);

Quite a few things can return failure here including
kvmppc_uv_migrate_mem_slot() and we are ignoring all of those.
I am wondering if this should be called from prepare_memory_region callback
instead of commit_memory_region. In the prepare phase, we have a way
to back out in case of error. Can you check if moving this call to
prepare callback is feasible?

In the other case in 1/5, the code issues ksm unmerge request on error,
but not here.

Also check if the code for 1st three calls can be shared with similar
code in 1/5.

Regards,
Bharata.