On Tuesday 20 Jul 2021 at 11:59:27 (+0100), Fuad Tabba wrote:
> Thanks for the clarification. It makes sense to preserve the existing
> behavior, but I was wondering if a comment would be good, describing
> what merits a "needs update"?
Sure thing, I'll add something for v2.
Cheers,
Quentin
Hi Quentin,
On Tue, Jul 20, 2021 at 11:30 AM 'Quentin Perret' via kernel-team
wrote:
>
> Hi Fuad,
>
> On Tuesday 20 Jul 2021 at 11:17:03 (+0100), Fuad Tabba wrote:
> > Hi Quentin,
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 19, 2021 at 11:47 AM Quentin Perret wrote:
> > >
> > > The current hypervisor stage-1
Hi Fuad,
On Tuesday 20 Jul 2021 at 11:17:03 (+0100), Fuad Tabba wrote:
> Hi Quentin,
>
>
> On Mon, Jul 19, 2021 at 11:47 AM Quentin Perret wrote:
> >
> > The current hypervisor stage-1 mapping code doesn't allow changing an
> > existing valid mapping. Relax this condition by allowing changes
Hi Quentin,
On Mon, Jul 19, 2021 at 11:47 AM Quentin Perret wrote:
>
> The current hypervisor stage-1 mapping code doesn't allow changing an
> existing valid mapping. Relax this condition by allowing changes that
> only target ignored bits, as that will soon be needed to annotate shared
>
The current hypervisor stage-1 mapping code doesn't allow changing an
existing valid mapping. Relax this condition by allowing changes that
only target ignored bits, as that will soon be needed to annotate shared
pages.
Signed-off-by: Quentin Perret
---
arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/pgtable.c | 18
