Hi Keqian,
On 3/15/21 8:42 PM, Gavin Shan wrote:
On 3/15/21 7:04 PM, Keqian Zhu wrote:
On 2021/3/15 12:18, Gavin Shan 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);
Nit: Keep a same style may be better(Assign vma when declare it).
Other looks good to me.
Yeah, I agree. I will adjust the code in v2 and included your r-b.
Thanks for your time to review.
After rechecking the code, I think it'd better to keep current style
because there is a follow-on validation on @vma. Keeping them together
seems a good idea. I think it wouldn't a big deal to you. So I will
keep current style with your r-b in v2.
vma = find_vma_intersection(current->mm, hva, reg_end);
if (!vma)
break;
Thanks,
Gavin
+ if (!vma)
break;
/*
@@ -1330,10 +1331,11 @@ int kvm_arch_prepare_memory_region(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);
+ if (!vma)
break;
/*
_______________________________________________
kvmarm mailing list
kvmarm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
