On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 11:45:59AM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
BTW, they are some bug fix patches on -master branch, but
it is not existed on -next branch:
commit: f411930442e01f9cf1bf4df41ff7e89476575c4d
commit: 85b7059169e128c57a3a8a3e588fb89cb2031da1
It causes code conflict if we do the
On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 10:34:28AM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
On 07/20/2012 08:39 AM, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 09:53:29PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
If it have no indirect shadow pages we need not protect any gfn,
this is always true for direct mmu without nested
On 07/20/2012 07:09 PM, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 10:34:28AM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
On 07/20/2012 08:39 AM, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 09:53:29PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
If it have no indirect shadow pages we need not protect any gfn,
this
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 09:53:29PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
If it have no indirect shadow pages we need not protect any gfn,
this is always true for direct mmu without nested
Signed-off-by: Xiao Guangrong xiaoguangr...@linux.vnet.ibm.com
Xiao,
What is the motivation? Numbers please.
In
On 07/20/2012 08:39 AM, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 09:53:29PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
If it have no indirect shadow pages we need not protect any gfn,
this is always true for direct mmu without nested
Signed-off-by: Xiao Guangrong xiaoguangr...@linux.vnet.ibm.com
BTW, they are some bug fix patches on -master branch, but
it is not existed on -next branch:
commit: f411930442e01f9cf1bf4df41ff7e89476575c4d
commit: 85b7059169e128c57a3a8a3e588fb89cb2031da1
It causes code conflict if we do the development on -next.
On 07/20/2012 08:39 AM, Marcelo Tosatti
If it have no indirect shadow pages we need not protect any gfn,
this is always true for direct mmu without nested
Signed-off-by: Xiao Guangrong xiaoguangr...@linux.vnet.ibm.com
---
arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c |3 +++
1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c
