On 12/06/2011 02:40 PM, Nadav Har'El wrote: > On Sun, Nov 13, 2011, Avi Kivity wrote about "Re: [PATCH 02/10] nEPT: MMU > context for nested EPT": > > On 11/13/2011 01:30 PM, Orit Wasserman wrote: > > > Maybe this patch can help, this is roughly what Avi wants (I hope) done > > > very quickly. > > > I'm sorry I don't have setup to run nested VMX at the moment so i can't > > > test it. > >... > > > +#define PTTYPE EPT > > > +#include "paging_tmpl.h" > > > +#undef PTTYPE > > > > Yes, that's the key. > > I'm now preparing a patch based on such ideas. > > One downside of this approach is that mmu.c (and therefore the x86 > module) will now include EPT-specific functions that are of no use or > relevance to the SVM code. It's not a terrible disaster, but it's > "unclean". I'll try to think if there's a cleaner way.
I'm perfectly willing to live with this. In general vmx.c and svm.c only deal with host-side differences between Intel and AMD. EPT support in paging.h is guest-side, so it doesn't belong there. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
