| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 8 Jul 2010 16:35:42 +0300 From: Gleb Natapov <gleb@...hat.com> To: Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com> Cc: kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, avi@...hat.com, mingo@...e.hu, a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl, tglx@...utronix.de, hpa@...or.com, cl@...ux-foundation.org, mtosatti@...hat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 11/12] Let host know whether the guest can handle async PF in non-userspace context. On Thu, Jul 08, 2010 at 12:28:18AM -0400, Rik van Riel wrote: > On 07/06/2010 12:24 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote: > >If guest can detect that it runs in non-preemptable context it can > >handle async PFs at any time, so let host know that it can send async > >PF even if guest cpu is not in userspace. > > The code looks correct. One question though - is there a > reason to implement the userspace-only async PF path at > all, since the handling of async PF in non-userspace context > is introduced simultaneously? > Guest userspace-only async PF handling is added in patch 4 and non-userspace is added in patch 10. It is done for easy reviewing. If I implement everything in one patch it will be harder to see why things are done the way they are IMHO. -- Gleb. -- 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