On 10.09.2024 17:55, [email protected] wrote: > On Tue, 2024-09-10 at 12:01 +0200, Jan Beulich wrote: >> On 02.09.2024 19:01, Oleksii Kurochko wrote: >>> Set up fixmap mappings and the L0 page table for fixmap support. >>> >>> Modify the Page Table Entries (PTEs) directly in arch_pmap_map() >>> instead of using set_fixmap() ( which relies on map_pages_to_xen() >>> ). >> >> What do you derive this from? There's no set_fixmap() here, and hence >> it's unknown how it is going to be implemented. > I derived it from the my code where is set_fixmap() is implemented but > agree that in brackets it is better to write "will use > map_pages_to_xen()" instead of "which relies on map_pages_to_xen()". > >> The most you can claim >> is that it is expected that it will use map_pages_to_xen(), which in >> turn ... >> >>> This change is necessary because PMAP is used when the domain map >>> page infrastructure is not yet initialized so map_pages_to_xen() >>> called by set_fixmap() needs to map pages on demand, which then >>> calls pmap() again, resulting in a loop. >> >> ... is only expected to use arch_pmap_map(). > it is what is written in the message, isn't it?
Not quite - the original sentence is written as if map_pages_to_xen() existed already in the code base, or was brought into existence by this very patch. (Of course I mean the real function, not the stub that's there.) Jan
