Re: [PATCH 5/9] KVM: MMU: fask check write-protect for direct mmu

From: Xiao Guangrong
Date: Thu Jul 19 2012 - 23:46:32 EST

BTW, they are some bug fix patches on -master branch, but
it is not existed on -next branch:
commit: f411930442e01f9cf1bf4df41ff7e89476575c4d
commit: 85b7059169e128c57a3a8a3e588fb89cb2031da1

It causes code conflict if we do the development on -next.

On 07/20/2012 08:39 AM, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:can
> On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 09:53:29PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote:
>> If it have no indirect shadow pages we need not protect any gfn,
>> this is always true for direct mmu without nested
>> Signed-off-by: Xiao Guangrong <xiaoguangrong@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Xiao,
> What is the motivation? Numbers please.
> In fact, what case was the original indirect_shadow_pages conditional in
> kvm_mmu_pte_write optimizing again?

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at