On Mon, 15 Mar 2021 04:18:42 +0000,
Gavin Shan <gshan@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> find_vma_intersection() has been existing to search the intersected
> vma. This uses the function where it's applicable, to simplify the
> code.
>
> Signed-off-by: Gavin Shan <gshan@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> arch/arm64/kvm/mmu.c | 10 ++++++----
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/mmu.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/mmu.c
> index 84e70f953de6..286b603ed0d3 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/mmu.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/mmu.c
> @@ -421,10 +421,11 @@ static void stage2_unmap_memslot(struct kvm *kvm,
> * +--------------------------------------------+
> */
> do {
> - struct vm_area_struct *vma = find_vma(current->mm, hva);
> + struct vm_area_struct *vma;
> hva_t vm_start, vm_end;
>
> - if (!vma || vma->vm_start >= reg_end)
> + vma = find_vma_intersection(current->mm, hva, reg_end);
For context, here's the definition of find_vma_intersection():
<quote>
static inline struct vm_area_struct * find_vma_intersection(struct mm_struct * mm, unsigned long start_addr, unsigned long end_addr)
{
struct vm_area_struct * vma = find_vma(mm,start_addr);
if (vma && end_addr <= vma->vm_start)
vma = NULL;
return vma;
}
</quote>
It seems that there is a boundary issue in either the old code or the
new one in the case where (reg_end == vma->start).
Which one is which?
M.
--
Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
