On 07.08.2012, at 15:58, Avi Kivity <a...@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 08/07/2012 04:44 PM, Alexander Graf wrote: >> >>> >>> Is this the correct place? Who says the caller of hva_to_pfn() is going >>> to map it? >> >> I don't think anyone is. However, we need the struct page, and all the >> generic kvm mm code tries hard to hide it from its users. The alternative >> would be to expose all those details, and I'm not sure that's a good idea. >> >> Essentially, we don't care if we're overly cautious. Clearing one page too >> much is way better than clearing one too few. > > Are you sure everyone uses hva_to_pfn()? x86 uses gfn_to_hva_many(), in > one place. Nope, I only checked that e500 adheres to that flow so far. I'm not even 100% sure that book3s is always happy yet. But I figured this is a step in the right direction. If we missed out on one, we can always add it later. The many function is a good spot. Maybe I'll just ckeck up all of kvm_main.c again for potential users. Alex -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm-ppc" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
