>>> On 13.08.15 at 11:35, <wei.l...@citrix.com> wrote: > On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 03:33:42AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote: >> >>> On 13.08.15 at 11:22, <wei.l...@citrix.com> wrote: >> > On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 08:16:33AM -0600, Jan Beulich wrote: >> >> ... and its callers. >> >> >> >> While all non-nested users are made fully honor the semantics of that >> >> type, doing so in the nested case seemed insane (if doable at all, >> >> considering VMCS shadowing), and hence there the respective operations >> >> are simply made fail. >> >> >> >> One case not (yet) taken care of is that of a page getting transitioned >> >> to this type after a mapping got established. >> >> >> >> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com> >> > >> > Is this a bug fix? I think so, but the title only says adjustment so I'd >> > better be sure. >> >> Yes, it is (I had hoped that the description would be sufficient to >> tell). > > Thanks for confirmation.
And I only now realize that I screwed up the title - what is here was what 0/2 had; this patch really is supposed to be named "x86/HVM: honor p2m_ram_ro in hvm_map_guest_frame_rw()" just like its v1 was. I'm sorry for that. Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
