From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: KVM: MMU: fix largepage shadow accounting with oos
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2008 13:35:50 +0300
Message-ID: <48DE0C86.1050201@redhat.com>
References: <20080925182352.GA15051@dmt.cnet>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: kvm-devel <kvm@vger.kernel.org>
To: Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>
Return-path: <kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:42996 "EHLO mx2.redhat.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1752144AbYI0Kfq (ORCPT <rfc822;kvm@vger.kernel.org>);
	Sat, 27 Sep 2008 06:35:46 -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 m8RAZkRU031351
	for <kvm@vger.kernel.org>; Sat, 27 Sep 2008 06:35:46 -0400
In-Reply-To: <20080925182352.GA15051@dmt.cnet>
Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <kvm.vger.kernel.org>

Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> There's no need to increase the largepage shadow count when syncing
> since there's no count decrement on unsync, only on destruction.
>
>   

Applied, thanks.

-- 
I have a truly marvellous patch that fixes the bug which this
signature is too narrow to contain.