On Mon, 3 Mar 2008, Nick Piggin wrote: > I'm still not completely happy with this. I had a very quick look > at the GRU driver, but I don't see why it can't be implemented > more like the regular TLB model, and have TLB insertions depend on > the linux pte, and do invalidates _after_ restricting permissions > to the pte. > > Ie. I'd still like to get rid of invalidate_range_begin, and get > rid of invalidate calls from places where permissions are relaxed.
Isnt this more a job for paravirt ops if it is so tightly bound to page tables? Are we not adding another similar API? > If we can agree on the API, then I don't see any reason why it can't > go into 2.6.25, unless someome wants more time to review it (but > 2.6.25 release should be quite far away still so there should be quite > a bit of time). API still has rcu issues and the example given for making things sleepable is only working for the aging callback. The most important callback is for try_to_unmao and page_mkclean. This means the API is still not generic enough and likely not extendable as needed in its present form. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. 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
