Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH v5 1/6] KVM: arm64: Introduce KVM_PGTABLE_S2_GUEST stage-2 flag | From | "wangyanan (Y)" <> | Date | Thu, 3 Jun 2021 20:36:02 +0800 |
| |
Hi Quentin,
On 2021/6/2 18:43, Quentin Perret wrote: > Hi Yanan, > > On Thursday 15 Apr 2021 at 19:50:27 (+0800), Yanan Wang wrote: >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_pgtable.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_pgtable.h >> index c3674c47d48c..a43cbe697b37 100644 >> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_pgtable.h >> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/kvm_pgtable.h >> @@ -61,10 +61,12 @@ struct kvm_pgtable_mm_ops { >> * @KVM_PGTABLE_S2_NOFWB: Don't enforce Normal-WB even if the CPUs have >> * ARM64_HAS_STAGE2_FWB. >> * @KVM_PGTABLE_S2_IDMAP: Only use identity mappings. >> + * @KVM_PGTABLE_S2_GUEST: Whether the page-tables are guest stage-2. >> */ >> enum kvm_pgtable_stage2_flags { >> KVM_PGTABLE_S2_NOFWB = BIT(0), >> KVM_PGTABLE_S2_IDMAP = BIT(1), >> + KVM_PGTABLE_S2_GUEST = BIT(2), > Assuming that we need this flag (maybe not given Marc's suggestion on > another patch), I'd recommend re-naming it to explain _what_ it does, > rather than _who_ is using it. I agree with this. > That's the principle we followed for e.g. KVM_PGTABLE_S2_IDMAP, so we > should be consistent here as well. But I think maybe we don't need the new flag anymore with Marc's suggestion. Currently the CMOs right before installation or update of a PTE are guest-specific. So if we also take the new optional callbacks as guest specific, then a new flag is not necessary because we can check whether the callbacks have been initialized to determine if we are managing a guest S2 PTE.
Thanks, Yanan > Thanks, > Quentin > .
| |