Am 11.09.19 um 17:08 schrieb Thomas Hellström (VMware):
> On 9/11/19 4:06 PM, Koenig, Christian wrote:
>> Am 11.09.19 um 12:10 schrieb Thomas Hellström (VMware):
>> [SNIP]
> The problem seen in TTM is that we want to be able to change the
> vm_page_prot from the fault handler, but it's
On 9/11/19 8:03 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
That distinction is important because if it ever comes to a choice
between adding a new lock to protect vm_page_prot (and consequently slow
down the whole vm system) and using the WRITE_ONCE solution in TTM, we
should know what the implications are.
On Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 12:49 AM Thomas Hellström (VMware)
wrote:
>
> Hi, Andy.
>
> On 9/11/19 6:18 AM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> >
> > As a for-real example, take a look at arch/x86/entry/vdso/vma.c. The
> > "vvar" VMA contains multiple pages that are backed by different types
> > of memory.
removing people that are probably not interested from CC
adding dri-devel
On 9/11/19 11:08 AM, Koenig, Christian wrote:
Am 10.09.19 um 21:26 schrieb Thomas Hellström (VMware):
On 9/10/19 6:11 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
On Sep 5, 2019, at 8:24 AM, Christoph Hellwig
wrote:
On Thu, Sep 05,
Am 10.09.19 um 21:26 schrieb Thomas Hellström (VMware):
> On 9/10/19 6:11 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>>
>>> On Sep 5, 2019, at 8:24 AM, Christoph Hellwig
>>> wrote:
>>>
On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 05:21:24PM +0200, Thomas Hellström (VMware)
wrote:
> On 9/5/19 4:15 PM, Dave Hansen
Hi, Andy.
On 9/11/19 6:18 AM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
On Tue, Sep 10, 2019 at 12:26 PM Thomas Hellström (VMware)
wrote:
On 9/10/19 6:11 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
On Sep 5, 2019, at 8:24 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 05:21:24PM +0200, Thomas Hellström (VMware) wrote:
On Tue, Sep 10, 2019 at 12:26 PM Thomas Hellström (VMware)
wrote:
>
> On 9/10/19 6:11 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> >
> >> On Sep 5, 2019, at 8:24 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 05:21:24PM +0200, Thomas Hellström (VMware) wrote:
> On 9/5/19 4:15 PM, Dave
On 9/10/19 6:11 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
On Sep 5, 2019, at 8:24 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 05:21:24PM +0200, Thomas Hellström (VMware) wrote:
On 9/5/19 4:15 PM, Dave Hansen wrote:
Hi Thomas,
Thanks for the second batch of patches! These look much improved on
> On Sep 5, 2019, at 8:24 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 05:21:24PM +0200, Thomas Hellström (VMware) wrote:
>>> On 9/5/19 4:15 PM, Dave Hansen wrote:
>>> Hi Thomas,
>>>
>>> Thanks for the second batch of patches! These look much improved on all
>>> fronts.
>>
>>
On 9/5/19 5:24 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 05:21:24PM +0200, Thomas Hellström (VMware) wrote:
On 9/5/19 4:15 PM, Dave Hansen wrote:
Hi Thomas,
Thanks for the second batch of patches! These look much improved on all
fronts.
Yes, although the TTM functionality isn't
On 9/5/19 5:59 PM, Dave Hansen wrote:
On 9/5/19 8:21 AM, Thomas Hellström (VMware) wrote:
#define pgprot_modify pgprot_modify
static inline pgprot_t pgprot_modify(pgprot_t oldprot, pgprot_t
newprot)
{
- pgprotval_t preservebits = pgprot_val(oldprot) & _PAGE_CHG_MASK;
-
On 9/5/19 8:21 AM, Thomas Hellström (VMware) wrote:
>>> #define pgprot_modify pgprot_modify
>>> static inline pgprot_t pgprot_modify(pgprot_t oldprot, pgprot_t
>>> newprot)
>>> {
>>> - pgprotval_t preservebits = pgprot_val(oldprot) & _PAGE_CHG_MASK;
>>> - pgprotval_t addbits =
On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 05:21:24PM +0200, Thomas Hellström (VMware) wrote:
> On 9/5/19 4:15 PM, Dave Hansen wrote:
> > Hi Thomas,
> >
> > Thanks for the second batch of patches! These look much improved on all
> > fronts.
>
> Yes, although the TTM functionality isn't in yet. Hopefully we won't
On 9/5/19 4:15 PM, Dave Hansen wrote:
Hi Thomas,
Thanks for the second batch of patches! These look much improved on all
fronts.
Yes, although the TTM functionality isn't in yet. Hopefully we won't
have to bother you with those though, since this assumes TTM will be
using the dma API.
Hi Thomas,
Thanks for the second batch of patches! These look much improved on all
fronts.
On 9/5/19 3:35 AM, Thomas Hellström (VMware) wrote:
> -/* mprotect needs to preserve PAT bits when updating vm_page_prot */
> +/*
> + * mprotect needs to preserve PAT and encryption bits when updating
> +
From: Thomas Hellstrom
When SEV or SME is enabled and active, vm_get_page_prot() typically
returns with the encryption bit set. This means that users of
pgprot_modify(, vm_get_page_prot()) (mprotect_fixup, do_mmap) typically
unintentionally sets encrypted page protection even on mmap'd coherent
16 matches
Mail list logo
