[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <498BDE1D.8030101@goop.org>
Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2009 22:52:13 -0800
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
To: akataria@...are.com
CC: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
Zach Amsden <zach@...are.com>,
Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
Rohit Jain <rjain@...are.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PARAVIRT/x86] BUGFIX: Put a missing paravirt_release_pmd in
pgd_dtor
Alok Kataria wrote:
> As it affects only VMI, instead of adding another callback, i have
> hooked on the paravirt_pgd_free call for vmi to release the pgd page.
> Below is the patch. I will run some overnight tests with this patch and
> get back if there are any errors.
>
I'd forgotten that I'd already added pgd_alloc/pgd_free. So, yes, just
use pgd_free.
>> But either way, calling release_pmd here is wrong, since its only meant
>> to be applied to pmds,
>>
> Maybe i misunderstand, but that's how it used to work before that
> commit, we had a single call to release_*pd*, no ?
>
I rearranged things, but I don't remember the details. I think pd was
being overloaded for both pgd and pmd, and I split it out so there was a
specific function for each level.
>> and it would break the Xen code.
>>
>
> i see xen doesn't define the alloc_pmd_clone call.
>
It defines alloc_pmd, but has no need for alloc_pmd_clone (there's no
shadow pagetable, so there's nothing to sync). Zach added specifically
for vmi's use.
J
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists