Hi Quentin,
> > > +static bool stage2_block_mapping_allowed(u64 addr, u64 end, u32 level,
> > > +struct stage2_map_data *data)
> > > +{
> > > + if (data->force_pte && (level < (KVM_PGTABLE_MAX_LEVELS - 1)))
> > > + return false;
> >
> > I
Hi Fuad,
On Monday 02 Aug 2021 at 11:49:28 (+0200), Fuad Tabba wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 29, 2021 at 3:28 PM Quentin Perret wrote:
> >
> > Much of the stage-2 manipulation logic relies on being able to destroy
> > block mappings if e.g. installing a smaller mapping in the range. The
> > rationale for
Hi Quentin,
On Thu, Jul 29, 2021 at 3:28 PM Quentin Perret wrote:
>
> Much of the stage-2 manipulation logic relies on being able to destroy
> block mappings if e.g. installing a smaller mapping in the range. The
> rationale for this behaviour is that stage-2 mappings can always be
> re-created
Much of the stage-2 manipulation logic relies on being able to destroy
block mappings if e.g. installing a smaller mapping in the range. The
rationale for this behaviour is that stage-2 mappings can always be
re-created lazily. However, this gets more complicated when the stage-2
page-table is used
