Re: [PATCH 2/3] add SPTE_HOST_WRITEABLE flag to the shadow ptes

2009-09-24 Thread Andrea Arcangeli
On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 09:47:17PM +0300, Izik Eidus wrote: this flag notify that the host physical page we are pointing to from the spte is write protected, and therefore we cant change its access to be write unless we run get_user_pages(write = 1). (this is needed for change_pte support in

[PATCH 2/3] add SPTE_HOST_WRITEABLE flag to the shadow ptes

2009-09-23 Thread Izik Eidus
this flag notify that the host physical page we are pointing to from the spte is write protected, and therefore we cant change its access to be write unless we run get_user_pages(write = 1). (this is needed for change_pte support in kvm) Signed-off-by: Izik Eidus iei...@redhat.com ---

[PATCH 2/3] add SPTE_HOST_WRITEABLE flag to the shadow ptes

2009-09-23 Thread Izik Eidus
this flag notify that the host physical page we are pointing to from the spte is write protected, and therefore we cant change its access to be write unless we run get_user_pages(write = 1). (this is needed for change_pte support in kvm) Signed-off-by: Izik Eidus iei...@redhat.com ---

Re: [PATCH 2/3] add SPTE_HOST_WRITEABLE flag to the shadow ptes

2009-09-14 Thread Marcelo Tosatti
On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 07:38:57PM +0300, Izik Eidus wrote: this flag notify that the host physical page we are pointing to from the spte is write protected, and therefore we cant change its access to be write unless we run get_user_pages(write = 1). (this is needed for change_pte support in

Re: [PATCH 2/3] add SPTE_HOST_WRITEABLE flag to the shadow ptes

2009-09-14 Thread Izik Eidus
Marcelo Tosatti wrote: Why can't you use the writable bit in the spte? So that you can only sync a writeable spte if it was writeable before, in sync_page? I could, but there we will add overhead for read only gptes that become writable in the guest... If you prefer to fault on the syncing

Re: [PATCH 2/3] add SPTE_HOST_WRITEABLE flag to the shadow ptes

2009-09-14 Thread Marcelo Tosatti
On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 07:51:16PM +0300, Izik Eidus wrote: Marcelo Tosatti wrote: Why can't you use the writable bit in the spte? So that you can only sync a writeable spte if it was writeable before, in sync_page? I could, but there we will add overhead for read only gptes that become

Re: [PATCH 2/3] add SPTE_HOST_WRITEABLE flag to the shadow ptes

2009-09-13 Thread Avi Kivity
On 09/10/2009 07:38 PM, Izik Eidus wrote: this flag notify that the host physical page we are pointing to from the spte is write protected, and therefore we cant change its access to be write unless we run get_user_pages(write = 1). (this is needed for change_pte support in kvm) diff --git

Re: [PATCH 2/3] add SPTE_HOST_WRITEABLE flag to the shadow ptes

2009-09-12 Thread Izik Eidus
Marcelo Tosatti wrote: On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 07:38:57PM +0300, Izik Eidus wrote: this flag notify that the host physical page we are pointing to from the spte is write protected, and therefore we cant change its access to be write unless we run get_user_pages(write = 1). (this is needed

[PATCH 2/3] add SPTE_HOST_WRITEABLE flag to the shadow ptes

2009-09-10 Thread Izik Eidus
this flag notify that the host physical page we are pointing to from the spte is write protected, and therefore we cant change its access to be write unless we run get_user_pages(write = 1). (this is needed for change_pte support in kvm) Signed-off-by: Izik Eidus iei...@redhat.com ---