On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 10:59:22 +0200 Avi Kivity <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 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. Please review -mm's mm/pagewalk.c for suitability. If is is unsuitable but repairable then please cc Matt Mackall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on the review. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
