On 16/05/16 20:15, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 16 May 2016 at 18:13, Sergey Fedorov <serge.f...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 16/05/16 19:09, Peter Maydell wrote:
>>> @@ -1996,7 +1997,10 @@ int page_unprotect(target_ulong address, uintptr_t
>>> pc, void *puc)
>>>
>>> /* and since the content will be modified, we must invalidate
>>> the corresponding translated code. */
>>> - tb_invalidate_phys_page(addr, pc, puc, true);
>>> + if (tb_invalidate_phys_page(addr, pc)) {
>>> + mmap_unlock();
>>> + cpu_resume_from_signal(current_cpu, puc);
>>> + }
>>> #ifdef DEBUG_TB_CHECK
>>> tb_invalidate_check(addr);
>>> #endif
>> Just my 2 cents: we could allow that cpu_resume_from_signal() call and
>> add mmap_lock_reset() similar to tb_lock_reset() to handle resetting
>> mmap_lock after a long jump.
> There's no need -- if you look at the rest of the patchset, that
> call goes away from this function entirely and ends up in the
> caller, at which point this function's handling of the mmap
> lock is the straightforward "lock on entry, unlock before return".
Reviewed-by: Sergey Fedorov <sergey.fedo...@linaro.org>
Thanks,
Sergey
