On 26.02.2025 14:56, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 24, 2025 at 01:27:24PM +0000, Alejandro Vallejo wrote:
>> --- a/xen/common/page_alloc.c
>> +++ b/xen/common/page_alloc.c
>> @@ -490,13 +490,11 @@ static long outstanding_claims; /* total outstanding 
>> claims by all domains */
>>  
>>  unsigned long domain_adjust_tot_pages(struct domain *d, long pages)
>>  {
>> -    long dom_before, dom_after, dom_claimed, sys_before, sys_after;
>> -
>>      ASSERT(rspin_is_locked(&d->page_alloc_lock));
>>      d->tot_pages += pages;
>>  
>>      /*
>> -     * can test d->claimed_pages race-free because it can only change
>> +     * can test d->outstanding_pages race-free because it can only change
>>       * if d->page_alloc_lock and heap_lock are both held, see also
>>       * domain_set_outstanding_pages below
>>       */
>> @@ -504,17 +502,16 @@ unsigned long domain_adjust_tot_pages(struct domain 
>> *d, long pages)
>>          goto out;
> 
> I think you can probably short-circuit the logic below if pages == 0?
> (and avoid taking the heap_lock)

Are there callers passing in 0?

>>      spin_lock(&heap_lock);
>> -    /* adjust domain outstanding pages; may not go negative */
>> -    dom_before = d->outstanding_pages;
>> -    dom_after = dom_before - pages;
>> -    BUG_ON(dom_before < 0);
>> -    dom_claimed = dom_after < 0 ? 0 : dom_after;
>> -    d->outstanding_pages = dom_claimed;
>> -    /* flag accounting bug if system outstanding_claims would go negative */
>> -    sys_before = outstanding_claims;
>> -    sys_after = sys_before - (dom_before - dom_claimed);
>> -    BUG_ON(sys_after < 0);
>> -    outstanding_claims = sys_after;
>> +    BUG_ON(outstanding_claims < d->outstanding_pages);
>> +    if ( pages > 0 && d->outstanding_pages < pages )
>> +    {
>> +        /* `pages` exceeds the domain's outstanding count. Zero it out. */
>> +        outstanding_claims -= d->outstanding_pages;
>> +        d->outstanding_pages = 0;
>> +    } else {
>> +        outstanding_claims -= pages;
>> +        d->outstanding_pages -= pages;
> 
> I wonder if it's intentional for a pages < 0 value to modify
> outstanding_claims and d->outstanding_pages, I think those values
> should only be set from domain_set_outstanding_pages().
> domain_adjust_tot_pages() should only decrease the value, but never
> increase either outstanding_claims or d->outstanding_pages.
> 
> At best the behavior is inconsistent, because once
> d->outstanding_pages reaches 0 there will be no further modification
> from domain_adjust_tot_pages().

Right, at that point the claim has run out. While freeing pages with an
active claim means that the claim gets bigger (which naturally needs
reflecting in the global).

Jan

Reply via email to