rmap_write_protect() is a poor name because it also write-protects SPTEs
in the TDP MMU, not just SPTEs in the rmap. It is also confusing that
rmap_write_protect() is not a simple wrapper around
__rmap_write_protect(), since that is the common pattern for functions
with double-underscore names.
Rename rmap_write_protect() to kvm_vcpu_write_protect_gfn() to convey
that KVM is write-protecting a specific gfn in the context of a vCPU.
No functional change intended.
Reviewed-by: Ben Gardon <bgardon@xxxxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Peter Xu <peterx@xxxxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@xxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: David Matlack <dmatlack@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c | 6 +++---
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c
index 8ed2b42a7aa3..b541683c29c7 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c
@@ -1421,7 +1421,7 @@ bool kvm_mmu_slot_gfn_write_protect(struct kvm *kvm,
return write_protected;
}
-static bool rmap_write_protect(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 gfn)
+static bool kvm_vcpu_write_protect_gfn(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 gfn)
{
struct kvm_memory_slot *slot;
@@ -2024,7 +2024,7 @@ static int mmu_sync_children(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
bool protected = false;
for_each_sp(pages, sp, parents, i)
- protected |= rmap_write_protect(vcpu, sp->gfn);
+ protected |= kvm_vcpu_write_protect_gfn(vcpu, sp->gfn);
if (protected) {
kvm_mmu_remote_flush_or_zap(vcpu->kvm, &invalid_list, true);
@@ -2149,7 +2149,7 @@ static struct kvm_mmu_page *kvm_mmu_get_page(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
hlist_add_head(&sp->hash_link, sp_list);
if (!direct) {
account_shadowed(vcpu->kvm, sp);
- if (level == PG_LEVEL_4K && rmap_write_protect(vcpu, gfn))
+ if (level == PG_LEVEL_4K && kvm_vcpu_write_protect_gfn(vcpu, gfn))
kvm_flush_remote_tlbs_with_address(vcpu->kvm, gfn, 1);
}
trace_kvm_mmu_get_page(sp, true);
base-commit: edb9e50dbe18394d0fc9d0494f5b6046fc912d33
--
2.35.0.rc0.227.g00780c9af4-goog
