Avi Kivity wrote: > Avi Kivity wrote: > >> Exactly. But it is better to be explicit about it and pass the page >> directly like you did before. I hate to make you go back-and-fourth, >> but I did not understand the issue completely before. >> >> > > btw, the call to gfn_to_page() can happen in page_fault() instead of > walk_addr(); that will reduce the amount of error handling, and will > simplify the callers to walk_addr() that don't need the page. > >
Note further that all this doesn't obviate the need for follow_page() (or get_user_pages_inatomic()); we still need something in update_pte() for the demand paging case. -- Do not meddle in the internals of kernels, for they are subtle and quick to panic. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ kvm-devel mailing list kvm-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kvm-devel
