On Thu, May 09, 2013 at 06:16:55PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
> On 05/09/2013 02:44 PM, Takuya Yoshikawa wrote:
> > Rather than clearing the ACC_WRITE_MASK bit of pte_access in the
> > "if (mmu_need_write_protect())" block not to call mark_page_dirty() in
> > the following if statement, simply moving the call into the appropriate
> > else block is better.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Takuya Yoshikawa <[email protected]>
> > ---
> > arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c | 7 ++-----
> > 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c
> > index 004cc87..08119a8 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c
> > @@ -2386,14 +2386,11 @@ static int set_spte(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64
> > *sptep,
> > pgprintk("%s: found shadow page for %llx, marking ro\n",
> > __func__, gfn);
> > ret = 1;
> > - pte_access &= ~ACC_WRITE_MASK;
> > spte &= ~(PT_WRITABLE_MASK | SPTE_MMU_WRITEABLE);
> > - }
> > + } else
> > + mark_page_dirty(vcpu->kvm, gfn);
> > }
> >
> > - if (pte_access & ACC_WRITE_MASK)
> > - mark_page_dirty(vcpu->kvm, gfn);
> > -
> > set_pte:
> > if (mmu_spte_update(sptep, spte))
> > kvm_flush_remote_tlbs(vcpu->kvm);
>
> That function is really magic, and this change do no really help it. I had
> several
> patches posted some months ago to make these kind of code better
> understanding, but
> i am too tired to update them.
Can you point me to them? Your work is really appreciated, I am sorry
you feel this way.
--
Gleb.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
