On Thu, 06 Nov 2014 16:40:43 -0800 Mario Smarduch <m.smard...@samsung.com> wrote:
> kvm_get_dirty_log() provides generic handling of dirty bitmap, currently > reused > by several architectures. Building on that we intrdoduce > kvm_get_dirty_log_protect() adding write protection to mark these pages dirty > for future write access, before next KVM_GET_DIRTY_LOG ioctl call from user > space. > > Signed-off-by: Mario Smarduch <m.smard...@samsung.com> > --- > include/linux/kvm_host.h | 9 +++++ > virt/kvm/kvm_main.c | 95 > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 2 files changed, 104 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c > index 887df87..f017760 100644 > --- a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c > +++ b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c > @@ -981,6 +981,101 @@ out: > } > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kvm_get_dirty_log); > > +#if defined(CONFIG_S390) || defined(CONFIG_PPC) || defined(CONFIG_MIPS) || \ > + defined(CONFIG_IA64) || defined(CONFIG_X86) || defined(CONFIG_ARM) || \ > + defined(CONFIG_ARM64) Does this deserve a config symbol that can be selected by architectures actually using kvm_get_dirty_log_protect()? I.e., #ifndef CONFIG_KVM_ARCH_DIRTY_LOG_PROTECT or so? > +/* > + * For architectures that don't use kvm_get_dirty_log_protect() for dirty > page > + * logging, calling this function is illegal. Otherwise the function is > defined > + * in arch subtree and this restriction is removed. > + */ What about /* * For architectures that don't use kvm_get_dirty_log_protect() for dirty page * logging, we must never end up calling this function. Architectures that do * use it define their own version of this function. */ instead? > +void kvm_arch_mmu_write_protect_pt_masked(struct kvm *kvm, > + struct kvm_memory_slot *slot, > + gfn_t gfn_offset, > + unsigned long mask) > +{ > + BUG(); > +} > +#endif > + (...) -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html