[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140424145545.GA17450@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2014 16:55:45 +0200
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
To: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>
Cc: Avi Kivity <avi.kivity@...il.com>, Gleb Natapov <gleb@...nel.org>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
Dominik Dingel <dingel@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] KVM: async_pf: use_mm/mm_users fixes
On 04/24, Christian Borntraeger wrote:
>
> On 21/04/14 15:25, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> > Hello.
> >
> > Completely untested and I know nothing about kvm ;) Please review.
> >
> > But use_mm() really looks misleading, and the usage of mm_users looks
> > "obviously wrong". I already sent this change while we were discussing
> > vmacache, but it was ignored. Since then kvm_async_page_present_sync()
> > was added into async_pf_execute() into async_pf_execute(), but it seems
> > to me that use_mm() is still unnecessary.
> >
> > Oleg.
> >
> > virt/kvm/async_pf.c | 10 ++++------
> > 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> >
>
> I gave both patches some testing on s390, seems fine. I think patch2 really
> does fix a bug. So if Paolo, Marcelo, Gleb agree (maybe do a test on x86 for
> async_pf) both patches are good to go. Given that somebody tests this on x86:
>
> Acked-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>
Thanks!
I think x86 should be fine, it doesn't select CONFIG_KVM_ASYNC_PF_SYNC and
get_user_pages() is certainly fine without use_mm(). And I still think it
should do get_user_pages(tsk => NULL) but this is minor.
Oleg.
--
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