From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Mukesh Rathor <mukesh.rathor@oracle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 7/8]: PVH privcmd changes
Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2012 10:34:14 -0700
Message-ID: <20121005103414.22202e9a@mantra.us.oracle.com>
References: <20120921122123.33489ce1@mantra.us.oracle.com>
	<1349270495.650.144.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com>
	<20121003153106.65237f07@mantra.us.oracle.com>
	<1349340642.650.227.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com>
	<20121004112048.53767720@mantra.us.oracle.com>
	<1349428878.20946.18.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
In-Reply-To: <1349428878.20946.18.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@citrix.com>
Cc: "Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" <Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>, Stefano Stabellini <Stefano.Stabellini@eu.citrix.com>, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On Fri, 5 Oct 2012 10:21:18 +0100
Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@citrix.com> wrote:

> On Thu, 2012-10-04 at 19:20 +0100, Mukesh Rathor wrote:
> > On Thu, 4 Oct 2012 09:50:42 +0100
> > Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@citrix.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > On Wed, 2012-10-03 at 23:31 +0100, Mukesh Rathor wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 3 Oct 2012 14:21:35 +0100
> > > > Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@citrix.com> wrote:
..... 
> > > > Right, that's why I had it originally checking for auto xlated
> > > > and doing something different. I think that is better than to
> > > > change this and change again. I'll change it back to just
> > > > putting the ptr here.
> > > 
> > > Won't that break because on the second call you will pass in the
> > > freshly allocated pointer and overwrite the exiting (useful) one
> > > with it?
> > 
> > No, for xlate, I just check for NULL. I didn't think it was big 
> > deal to special case xlate in this case. We got so many if xlate 
> > cases already thru the code. It leaves the semantics easy to 
> > understand: NULL == avail. 1 == locked PV. PTR == Locked PVH. I'll
> > add a comment this time :).
> 
> The transition from NULL => Locked PVH still needs to be done
> atomically and without clobbering any existing non-NULL value,
> otherwise it doesn't actually protect against multiple mappings like
> it is supposed to.
> 
> Ian.
> 

yes, of course :).