On Thu, 17 May 2012 13:24:41 +0300
Avi Kivity <a...@redhat.com> wrote:
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> index 2256f51..a2149d8 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c
> @@ -3130,7 +3130,9 @@ int kvm_vm_ioctl_get_dirty_log(struct kvm *kvm, struct
> kvm_dirty_log *log)
> kvm_mmu_write_protect_pt_masked(kvm, memslot, offset, mask);
> }
> if (is_dirty)
> - kvm_flush_remote_tlbs(kvm);
> + kvm_mark_tlb_dirty(kvm);
> +
> + kvm_cond_flush_remote_tlbs(kvm);
>
> spin_unlock(&kvm->mmu_lock);
Any reason not to move this flush outside of the mmu_lock in this
patch series?
Unlike other rmap write protections, this one seems to be simple.
Takuya
--
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
