[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <a03b7cf0-8847-2a60-ea2b-b83f5d82939a@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 11:56:41 +0100
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
To: Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Sean Christopherson <sean.j.christopherson@...el.com>,
"Dr . David Alan Gilbert" <dgilbert@...hat.com>,
Andrew Jones <drjones@...hat.com>,
Lei Cao <lei.cao@...atus.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v13 05/14] KVM: X86: Implement ring-based dirty memory
tracking
Just very few changes:
On 01/10/20 03:22, Peter Xu wrote:
> @@ -6373,3 +6386,107 @@ ranges that KVM should reject access to.
> In combination with KVM_CAP_X86_USER_SPACE_MSR, this allows user space to
> trap and emulate MSRs that are outside of the scope of KVM as well as
> limit the attack surface on KVM's MSR emulation code.
> +
> +8.28 KVM_CAP_DIRTY_LOG_RING
> +---------------------------
Here I made a few edits, but nothing major. Throughout the patch I
replaced "collected" with "harvested" since the documentation was using
it already and it's a bit more unique ("collect" reminds me too much of
garbage collection and perhaps could be confused with the kernel's
operation for the reset ioctl).
> +#ifdef CONFIG_X86
> + return KVM_DIRTY_RING_MAX_ENTRIES * sizeof(struct kvm_dirty_gfn);
> +#else
> + return 0;
> +#endif
And this can be "#if KVM_DIRTY_LOG_PAGE_OFFSET > 0" instead.
Paolo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists