On Fri, 25 Feb 2022 03:34:47 +0000, Kalesh Singh <kaleshsingh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > pkvm_hyp_alloc_private_va_range() can be used to reserve private VA ranges > in the pKVM nVHE hypervisor (). Also update __pkvm_create_private_mapping() > to allow specifying an alignment for the private VA mapping. > > These will be used to implement stack guard pages for pKVM nVHE hypervisor > (in a subsequent patch in the series). > > Credits to Quentin Perret <qperret@xxxxxxxxxx> for the idea of moving > private VA allocation out of __pkvm_create_private_mapping() > > Signed-off-by: Kalesh Singh <kaleshsingh@xxxxxxxxxx> > --- > > Changes in v4: > - Handle null ptr in pkvm_alloc_private_va_range() and replace > IS_ERR_OR_NULL checks in callers with IS_ERR checks, per Fuad > - Fix kernel-doc comments format, per Fuad > - Format __pkvm_create_private_mapping() prototype args (< 80 col), per Fuad > > Changes in v3: > - Handle null ptr in IS_ERR_OR_NULL checks, per Mark > > Changes in v2: > - Allow specifying an alignment for the private VA allocations, per Marc I probably badly expressed my earlier concern. Yes, an alignment is necessary. But how often do we want an alignment that isn't naturally aligned to the size of the allocation (i.e. the power of 2 >= the size of the allocation)? This is what the rest of the kernel does (get_order() and co), and I thing we should follow this. This applies to both this patch and the previous one. Thanks, M. -- Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible. _______________________________________________ kvmarm mailing list kvmarm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/mailman/listinfo/kvmarm
