Re: [PATCH 18/22] kvm: mmu: Support disabling dirty logging for the tdp MMU

[Ben Gardon]

On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 6:09 PM Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On 25/09/20 23:22, Ben Gardon wrote:
> > +     for_each_tdp_pte_root(iter, root, start, end) {
> > +             if (!is_shadow_present_pte(iter.old_spte) ||
> > +                 is_last_spte(iter.old_spte, iter.level))
> > +                     continue;
> > +
>
> I'm starting to wonder if another iterator like
> for_each_tdp_leaf_pte_root would be clearer, since this idiom repeats
> itself quite often.  The tdp_iter_next_leaf function would be easily
> implemented as
>
>         while (likely(iter->valid) &&
>                (!is_shadow_present_pte(iter.old_spte) ||
>                 is_last_spte(iter.old_spte, iter.level))
>                 tdp_iter_next(iter);

Do you see a substantial efficiency difference between adding a
tdp_iter_next_leaf and building on for_each_tdp_pte_using_root with
something like:

#define for_each_tdp_leaf_pte_using_root(_iter, _root, _start, _end)    \
        for_each_tdp_pte_using_root(_iter, _root, _start, _end)         \
                if (!is_shadow_present_pte(_iter.old_spte) ||           \
                    !is_last_spte(_iter.old_spte, _iter.level))         \
                        continue;                                       \
                else

I agree that putting those checks in a wrapper makes the code more concise.

>
> Paolo
>