From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Marcelo Tosatti Subject: Re: [PATCH] do not free active mmu pages in free_mmu_pages() Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2009 18:33:22 -0300 Message-ID: <20090316213322.GA5439@amt.cnet> References: <20090311100755.GA19724@redhat.com> <20090316201533.GA4477@amt.cnet> <20090316203401.GB7898@redhat.com> <20090316210152.GA5077@amt.cnet> <20090316212010.GC7898@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: avi@redhat.com, marcelo@redhat.com, kvm@vger.kernel.org To: Gleb Natapov Return-path: Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:60912 "EHLO mx2.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752320AbZCPVec (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Mar 2009 17:34:32 -0400 Received: from int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (int-mx2.corp.redhat.com [172.16.27.26]) by mx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n2GLYSDe001203 for ; Mon, 16 Mar 2009 17:34:28 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090316212010.GC7898@redhat.com> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 11:20:10PM +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote: > > mmu_lock should be held there, and apparently it is not. > > > Yeah, my first solution was to add mmu_lock, but why function that gets > vcpu as an input should destroy data structure that is global for the VM. Point. > There is kvm_mmu_zap_all() that does same thing (well almost) and also does > proper locking. Shouldn't it be called during VM destruction instead? Yes, that would better (which happens implicitly with mmu notifiers ->release).