On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 11:14:45PM +0200, Florent Revest wrote:
> On Thu, 2017-08-31 at 11:23 +0200, Christoffer Dall wrote:
> > > diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/mmu.c b/virt/kvm/arm/mmu.c
> > > index 2ea21da..1d2d3df 100644
> > > --- a/virt/kvm/arm/mmu.c
> > > +++ b/virt/kvm/arm/mmu.c
> > > @@ -772,6 +
On Thu, 2017-08-31 at 11:23 +0200, Christoffer Dall wrote:
> > diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/mmu.c b/virt/kvm/arm/mmu.c
> > index 2ea21da..1d2d3df 100644
> > --- a/virt/kvm/arm/mmu.c
> > +++ b/virt/kvm/arm/mmu.c
> > @@ -772,6 +772,11 @@ static void stage2_unmap_memslot(struct kvm
> > *kvm,
> >
Hi Florent,
I'd like for the UEFI folks and arm64 kernel maintainers to express
their views on this overall approach before I do an in-depth review, but
I have some random comments based on reading this patch:
On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 09:31:34AM +0100, Florent Revest wrote:
> Usual KVM virtual mac
Usual KVM virtual machines map guest's physical addresses from a process
userspace memory. However, with the new concept of internal VMs, a virtual
machine can be created from the kernel, without any link to a userspace
context. Hence, some of the KVM's architecture-specific code needs to be
modifi
4 matches
Mail list logo