[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4BFE5D78.5040204@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 27 May 2010 14:54:32 +0300
From: Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
To: Xiao Guangrong <xiaoguangrong@...fujitsu.com>
CC: Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
KVM list <kvm@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] KVM: MMU: fix relaxing permission
On 05/27/2010 02:18 PM, Avi Kivity wrote:
>
>> And, i think use 'spte.w=1, spte.u=0' to emulate 'guest cr0.wp=0 and
>> gpte.w=0'
>> is not a good way since it can completely stop user process access,
>> but in this
>> case, user process is usually read and kernel lazily to write, just
>> like vdso,
>> it will generate a lots of #PF
>
> As soon as the guest kernel stops writing we switch back to
> gpte.w=gpte.u=1 and the guest can access it completely. For the case
> where both the kernel and userspace use interleaved access, you are
> right, but I don't see a better way, do you?
To expand, we only set spte.w=1 on write faults. So if the guest only
reads the page, we'll instantiate an spte with u=1 and w=0.
--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
--
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