On 08/05/18 17:10, Roger Pau Monné wrote: > On Tue, May 08, 2018 at 02:03:04PM +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote: >> c/s 4c5d78a10d "x86/pagewalk: Re-implement the pagetable walker" dropped the >> consumer of smap_policy. Looking at c/s 31ae587e6f which introduced the >> smap_check logic, it exists only to work around a bug in guest_walk_tables() >> was resolved by the aformentioned commit. >> >> Remove the unused variables and associated infrastructure. >> >> Reported-by: Jason Andryuk <[email protected]> >> Signed-off-by: Andrew Cooper <[email protected]> > Reviewed-by: Roger Pau Monné <[email protected]> > >> diff --git a/xen/include/asm-x86/domain.h b/xen/include/asm-x86/domain.h >> index 8b66096..197f8d6 100644 >> --- a/xen/include/asm-x86/domain.h >> +++ b/xen/include/asm-x86/domain.h >> @@ -595,7 +583,6 @@ struct arch_vcpu >> >> struct guest_memory_policy >> { >> - smap_check_policy_t smap_policy; >> bool nested_guest_mode; > Maybe guest_memory_policy could be dropped and > update_guest_memory_policy updated to take a bool nested_mode > parameter?
update_guest_memory_policy() stores the old value in the passed structure, and would more accurately be toggle_guest_memory_policy() when it came to guest mode. > Or the function can be dropped altogether likely. Sadly not yet. This exists because of Xen's virtual-address based API for the shared info and time mappings. This API is bad and wrong and wants fixing. ISTR Juergen and Julien having plans to deal with this? ~Andrew _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
