From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Avi Kivity Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] KVM: MMU: move bits lost judgement into a separate function Date: Mon, 02 Aug 2010 10:41:08 +0300 Message-ID: <4C567694.2090808@redhat.com> References: <4C4E5313.1080308@cn.fujitsu.com> <4C4E536E.7030109@cn.fujitsu.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Marcelo Tosatti , LKML , KVM list To: Xiao Guangrong Return-path: In-Reply-To: <4C4E536E.7030109@cn.fujitsu.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org On 07/27/2010 06:33 AM, Xiao Guangrong wrote: > Introduce spte_bits_lost() function to judge whether spte bits will > miss, it's more readable and can help us to cleanup code later > > Signed-off-by: Xiao Guangrong > --- > arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c | 20 +++++++++++++++++--- > 1 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c > index e10f2bd..dd6c192 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu.c > @@ -303,6 +303,20 @@ static u64 __xchg_spte(u64 *sptep, u64 new_spte) > #endif > } > > +static bool spte_bits_lost(u64 spte) > +{ > + if (!shadow_accessed_mask) > + return false; > + > + if (!is_shadow_present_pte(spte)) > + return false; > + > + if (spte& shadow_accessed_mask) > + return false; > + > + return true; > +} IMO spte_has_volatile_bits() is a clearer name, "lost" implies they are already gone. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function