From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Xiao Guangrong <xiaoguangrong@cn.fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] KVM: MMU: fix accessed bit set on prefault path
Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2010 10:20:38 +0800
Message-ID: <4CF5B0F6.8030900@cn.fujitsu.com>
References: <4CF4C535.8080405@cn.fujitsu.com> <4CF4C587.7080000@cn.fujitsu.com> <20101130132915.GG2187@redhat.com> <4CF52BC6.9020401@cn.fujitsu.com> <20101130175005.GA2924@redhat.com> <4CF53F41.1040503@cn.fujitsu.com> <20101130183833.GB2924@redhat.com> <4CF54C4F.80901@cn.fujitsu.com> <20101130192059.GC2924@redhat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>, Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, KVM <kvm@vger.kernel.org>
To: Gleb Natapov <gleb@redhat.com>
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <20101130192059.GC2924@redhat.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org

On 12/01/2010 03:20 AM, Gleb Natapov wrote:

> Firs of all if guest is PV the guest process cannot be killed. Second
> why is it a problem that we marked pfn as accessed on speculative path?
> What problem it causes especially since it is very likely that the page
> will be accessed shortly anyway?
> 

Hi Avi, Marcelo,

What is your opinion on this point?