From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Xiao Guangrong Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] KVM: MMU: allow more page become unsync at gfn mapping time Date: Mon, 24 May 2010 15:14:40 +0800 Message-ID: <4BFA2760.5000508@cn.fujitsu.com> References: <4BF91C34.6020904@cn.fujitsu.com> <4BF932DD.5070900@redhat.com> <4BF9DE88.4060609@cn.fujitsu.com> <4BFA1B94.9010403@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Marcelo Tosatti , LKML , KVM list To: Avi Kivity Return-path: In-Reply-To: <4BFA1B94.9010403@redhat.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org Avi Kivity wrote: > On 05/24/2010 05:03 AM, Xiao Guangrong wrote: >> >> Avi Kivity wrote: >> >> >>>> + if (need_unsync) >>>> + kvm_unsync_pages(vcpu, gfn); >>>> return 0; >>>> } >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> Looks good, I'm just uncertain about role.invalid handling. What's the >>> reasoning here? >>> >>> >> Avi, >> >> Thanks for your reply. >> >> We no need worry about 'role.invalid' here, since we only allow the >> PTE shadow >> pages(role.level == 1) become unsync, and in current code, >> 'role.invalid' is only >> used for root shadow pages. >> > > Right, the invlpg change is not it yet. But I think it should be in > this patch; I don't like subtle dependencies, and it will make the > invplg patch simpler. > OK, i'll fix those two patches, thanks