Re: [PATCH 1/2] arm/arm64: kvm: drop inappropriate use of kvm_is_mmio_pfn()

[Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@linaro.org>]

On Mon, Dec 01, 2014 at 10:54:44AM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> 
> 
> On 01/12/2014 10:16, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> > On 21 November 2014 at 12:24, Christoffer Dall
> > <christoffer.dall@linaro.org> wrote:
> >> On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 09:33:55AM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
> >>> Instead of using kvm_is_mmio_pfn() to decide whether a host region
> >>> should be stage 2 mapped with device attributes, add a new static
> >>> function kvm_is_device_pfn() that disregards RAM pages with the
> >>> reserved bit set, as those should usually not be mapped as device
> >>> memory.
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>
> >>> ---
> >>>  arch/arm/kvm/mmu.c | 7 ++++++-
> >>>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/arch/arm/kvm/mmu.c b/arch/arm/kvm/mmu.c
> >>> index 57a403a5c22b..b007438242e2 100644
> >>> --- a/arch/arm/kvm/mmu.c
> >>> +++ b/arch/arm/kvm/mmu.c
> >>> @@ -834,6 +834,11 @@ static bool kvm_is_write_fault(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu)
> >>>       return kvm_vcpu_dabt_iswrite(vcpu);
> >>>  }
> >>>
> >>> +static bool kvm_is_device_pfn(unsigned long pfn)
> >>> +{
> >>> +     return !pfn_valid(pfn);
> >>> +}
> >>> +
> >>>  static int user_mem_abort(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, phys_addr_t fault_ipa,
> >>>                         struct kvm_memory_slot *memslot, unsigned long hva,
> >>>                         unsigned long fault_status)
> >>> @@ -904,7 +909,7 @@ static int user_mem_abort(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, phys_addr_t fault_ipa,
> >>>       if (is_error_pfn(pfn))
> >>>               return -EFAULT;
> >>>
> >>> -     if (kvm_is_mmio_pfn(pfn))
> >>> +     if (kvm_is_device_pfn(pfn))
> >>>               mem_type = PAGE_S2_DEVICE;
> >>>
> >>>       spin_lock(&kvm->mmu_lock);
> >>> --
> >>> 1.8.3.2
> >>>
> >> Acked-by: Christoffer Dall <christoffer.dall@linaro.org>
> > 
> > These 2 patches are now in 3.18-rc7, so they can be dropped from the
> > kvmarm queue/next/etc branches
> 
> If they are in queue, they can be dropped.  If they are in next, please
> leave them in as the next branch should not be rebased.  Duplicate
> commits are generally harmless.
> 
They are in kvmarm/next and will stay there ;)

-Christoffer