From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Avi Kivity Subject: Re: [patch 3/5] KVM: MMU: add kvm_mmu_shadow_walk helper Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2009 12:17:09 +0300 Message-ID: <4A2F7A15.2080302@redhat.com> References: <20090609213009.436123773@amt.cnet> <20090609213312.838419569@amt.cnet> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, sheng.yang@intel.com To: Marcelo Tosatti Return-path: Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:60643 "EHLO mx2.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755576AbZFJJRJ (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Jun 2009 05:17:09 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20090609213312.838419569@amt.cnet> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Marcelo Tosatti wrote: > Required by EPT misconfiguration handler. > > Signed-off-by: Marcelo Tosatti > > Index: kvm/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c > =================================================================== > --- kvm.orig/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c > +++ kvm/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c > @@ -3013,6 +3013,26 @@ out: > return r; > } > > +void kvm_mmu_shadow_walk(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 addr, > + struct mmu_shadow_walk *walk) > +{ > + struct kvm_shadow_walk_iterator iterator; > + > + spin_lock(&vcpu->kvm->mmu_lock); > + for_each_shadow_entry(vcpu, addr, iterator) { > + int err; > + > + err = walk->fn(vcpu, iterator.sptep, iterator.level, walk); > + if (err) > + break; > + > + if (!is_shadow_present_pte(*iterator.sptep)) > + break; > + } > + spin_unlock(&vcpu->kvm->mmu_lock); > +} > +EXPORT_SYMBOL(kvm_mmu_shadow_walk); > + > Isn't it simpler to invoke for_each_shadow_entry(), instead of defining a callback and calling it? We had those callbacks once, then switched to for_each. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function