On 07.08.2025 15:35, Oleksii Kurochko wrote:
>
> On 8/5/25 12:43 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 31.07.2025 17:58, Oleksii Kurochko wrote:
>>> +static int p2m_alloc_root_table(struct p2m_domain *p2m)
>>> +{
>>> + struct domain *d = p2m->domain;
>>> + struct page_info *page;
>>> + const unsigned int nr_root_pages = P2M_ROOT_PAGES;
>>> +
>>> + /*
>>> + * Return back nr_root_pages to assure the root table memory is also
>>> + * accounted against the P2M pool of the domain.
>>> + */
>>> + if ( !paging_ret_pages_to_domheap(d, nr_root_pages) )
>>> + return -ENOMEM;
>>> +
>>> + page = p2m_allocate_root(d);
>>> + if ( !page )
>>> + return -ENOMEM;
>>> +
>>> + p2m->root = page;
>>> +
>>> + return 0;
>>> +}
>> In the success case, shouldn't you bump the paging pool's total_pages by
>> P2M_ROOT_PAGES? (As the freeing side is missing so far, it's not easy to
>> tell whether there's [going to be] a balancing problem in the long run.
>> In the short run there certainly is.)
>
> I think that total_pages should be updated only in case when page is added
> to freelist.
> In the case of p2m root table, we just returning some pages to domheap and
> durint that decreasing an amount of total_pages as freelist has lesser pages,
> and then just allocate pages from domheap without adding them to freelist.
But how's freeing of a root table going to look like? Logically that group
of 4 pages would be put back into the pool. And from that the pool's
total_pages should reflect that right after successful allocation.
Jan
