From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Xiao Guangrong Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 08/14] nEPT: Redefine EPT-specific link_shadow_page() Date: Thu, 01 Aug 2013 15:24:06 +0800 Message-ID: <51FA0D16.1050703@linux.vnet.ibm.com> References: <1375282131-9713-1-git-send-email-gleb@redhat.com> <1375282131-9713-9-git-send-email-gleb@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, Jun Nakajima , Yang Zhang , pbonzini@redhat.com To: Gleb Natapov Return-path: Received: from e23smtp08.au.ibm.com ([202.81.31.141]:45915 "EHLO e23smtp08.au.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750936Ab3HAHYO (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Aug 2013 03:24:14 -0400 Received: from /spool/local by e23smtp08.au.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Thu, 1 Aug 2013 17:21:08 +1000 Received: from d23relay03.au.ibm.com (d23relay03.au.ibm.com [9.190.235.21]) by d23dlp03.au.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B407357804E for ; Thu, 1 Aug 2013 17:24:09 +1000 (EST) Received: from d23av01.au.ibm.com (d23av01.au.ibm.com [9.190.234.96]) by d23relay03.au.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id r717NxRl10748352 for ; Thu, 1 Aug 2013 17:23:59 +1000 Received: from d23av01.au.ibm.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by d23av01.au.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id r717O8iN026804 for ; Thu, 1 Aug 2013 17:24:09 +1000 In-Reply-To: <1375282131-9713-9-git-send-email-gleb@redhat.com> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 07/31/2013 10:48 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote: > From: Yang Zhang > } > } > return emulate; > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/paging_tmpl.h b/arch/x86/kvm/paging_tmpl.h > index 762c904..0d25351 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/paging_tmpl.h > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/paging_tmpl.h > @@ -555,7 +555,7 @@ static int FNAME(fetch)(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, gva_t addr, > goto out_gpte_changed; > > if (sp) > - link_shadow_page(it.sptep, sp); > + link_shadow_page(it.sptep, sp, PTTYPE != PTTYPE_EPT); It is better to use "!!PT_GUEST_ACCESSED_MASK" instead? It will be easier when we export A/D to guest in the further. Others look good to me. Reviewed-by: Xiao Guangrong