On Wed, 2016-01-27 at 09:34 +, Tim Deegan wrote:
> Hi,
>
> At 07:22 + on 27 Jan (1453879344), Han, Huaitong wrote:
> > On Tue, 2016-01-26 at 14:30 +, Tim Deegan wrote:
> > > This seems OK. But can you please:
> > > - Add this new adjustment once, in paging_gva_to_gfn(), instead
> >
Hi,
At 07:22 + on 27 Jan (1453879344), Han, Huaitong wrote:
> On Tue, 2016-01-26 at 14:30 +, Tim Deegan wrote:
> > This seems OK. But can you please:
> > - Add this new adjustment once, in paging_gva_to_gfn(), instead of
> >adding it to each implementation; and
> > - Adjust the
On Tue, 2016-01-26 at 14:30 +, Tim Deegan wrote:
> Hi,
>
> At 15:30 +0800 on 19 Jan (1453217458), Huaitong Han wrote:
> > At the moment, the pfec argument to gva_to_gfn has two functions:
> >
> > * To inform guest_walk what kind of access is happenind
> >
> > * As a value to pass back into
Hi,
At 15:30 +0800 on 19 Jan (1453217458), Huaitong Han wrote:
> At the moment, the pfec argument to gva_to_gfn has two functions:
>
> * To inform guest_walk what kind of access is happenind
>
> * As a value to pass back into the guest in the event of a fault.
>
> Unfortunately this is not
>>> On 19.01.16 at 08:30, wrote:
> At the moment, the pfec argument to gva_to_gfn has two functions:
>
> * To inform guest_walk what kind of access is happenind
>
> * As a value to pass back into the guest in the event of a fault.
>
> Unfortunately this is not quite
At the moment, the pfec argument to gva_to_gfn has two functions:
* To inform guest_walk what kind of access is happenind
* As a value to pass back into the guest in the event of a fault.
Unfortunately this is not quite treated consistently: the hvm_fetch_*
function will "pre-clear" the