[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <a063d76e-940c-5c68-bfca-fc0d99305411@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2016 08:22:35 +0200
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
To: "Raslan, KarimAllah" <karahmed@...zon.de>
Cc: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...hat.com>,
Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>,
Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@...hat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@....com>,
Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kvm, x86: Properly check whether a pfn is an MMIO or not
On 15/09/2016 07:54, Raslan, KarimAllah wrote:
>
>> On Jun 22, 2016, at 3:41 PM, Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On 22/06/2016 04:34, KarimAllah Ahmed wrote:
>>> pfn_valid check is not sufficient because it only checks if a page has a struct
>>> page or not, if for example "mem=" was passed to the kernel some valid pages
>>> won't have a struct page. This means that if guests were assigned valid memory
>>> that lies after the mem= boundary it will be passed uncached to the guest no
>>> matter what the guest caching attributes are for this memory.
>>
>> How can you pass memory after the mem= boundary to the guest?
>
> Does my previous reply answer your question?
Yes, but I'm not sure it's the right way to do it. Looking at the e820
memory map seems pretty hacky.
Paolo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists