Re: [RFC][PATCH 7/12 not tested yet] PPC: introduce __set_bit() like
Alexander Graf <[email protected]> Tue, 11 May 2010 16:00:42 +0000
| Newsgroups | org.kernel.vger.kvm-ia64,org.kernel.vger.kvm,org.kernel.vger.kvm-ppc,org.kernel.vger.linux-arch,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel,org.ozlabs.lists.linuxppc-dev |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Takuya Yoshikawa wrote: > During the work of KVM's dirty page logging optimization, we encountered > the need of manipulating bitmaps in user space efficiantly. To achive this, > we introduce a uaccess function for setting a bit in user space following > Avi's suggestion. > > KVM is now using dirty bitmaps for live-migration and VGA. Although we need > to update them from kernel side, copying them every time for updating the > dirty log is a big bottleneck. Especially, we tested that zero-copy bitmap > manipulation improves responses of GUI manipulations a lot. > > We also found one similar need in drivers/vhost/vhost.c in which the author > implemented set_bit_to_user() locally using inefficient functions: see TODO > at the top of that. > > Probably, this kind of need would be common for virtualization area. > > So we introduce a function set_bit_user_non_atomic(). > > Signed-off-by: Takuya Yoshikawa <[email protected]> > Signed-off-by: Fernando Luis Vazquez Cao <[email protected]> > CC: Alexander Graf <[email protected]> > CC: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <[email protected]> > CC: Paul Mackerras <[email protected]> > --- > arch/powerpc/include/asm/uaccess.h | 19 +++++++++++++++++++ > 1 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/uaccess.h b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/uaccess.h > index 3a01ce8..f878326 100644 > --- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/uaccess.h > +++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/uaccess.h > @@ -321,6 +321,25 @@ do { \ > __gu_err; \ > }) > > +static inline int set_bit_user_non_atomic(int nr, void __user *addr) > +{ > + u8 __user *p; > + u8 val; > + > + p = (u8 __user *)((unsigned long)addr + nr / BITS_PER_BYTE); > Does C do the + or the / first? Either way, I'd like to see brackets here :) Alex