On 20/01/2023 2:39 pm, Andrew Cooper wrote: > On 20/01/2023 2:20 pm, Jan Beulich wrote: >> On 20.01.2023 15:10, Andrew Cooper wrote: >>> On 20/01/2023 1:10 pm, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>> On 20.01.2023 12:45, Andrew Cooper wrote: >>>>> This is a global variable (actually 3, one per GUEST_PAGING_LEVEL), >>>>> operated >>>>> on using atomics only (with no regard to what else shares the same >>>>> cacheline), >>>>> which emits a diagnostic (in debug builds only) without changing any >>>>> program >>>>> behaviour. >>>>> >>>>> Based on read-only p2m types including logdirty, this diagnostic can be >>>>> tripped by entirely legitimate guest behaviour. >>>> Can it? At the very least shadow doesn't use p2m_ram_logdirty, but "cooks" >>>> log-dirty handling its own way. >>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.coop...@citrix.com> >>>> Acked-by: Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com> >>> Thanks. >>> >>>> with the last sentence above corrected (if need be: removed). >>> I can remove it, but I feel as if there ought to be something there. >>> >>> The other RO types are ram_ro, grant_map_ro and ram_shared. shared has >>> hopefully been unshared before getting to this point, while the other >>> two have unclear semantics (as neither exist in real systems). >> I'd be okay as long as the "including logdirty" part isn't there. If >> we're unsure, perhaps then also instead of "can" either "might" or >> "can possibly"? > I'll just delete it. It's not important enough for the time it's taking.
Oh, I see what you mean. Yeah, that will work. ~Andrew
