On 04/21/2012 12:18 PM, Marcelo Tosatti wrote: > On Sat, Apr 21, 2012 at 11:24:54AM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote: >> On 04/21/2012 05:33 AM, Marcelo Tosatti wrote: >> >> >>>> static bool >>>> __rmap_write_protect(struct kvm *kvm, unsigned long *rmapp, int level) >>>> { >>>> @@ -1050,24 +1078,13 @@ __rmap_write_protect(struct kvm *kvm, unsigned long *rmapp, int level) >>>> >>>> for (sptep = rmap_get_first(*rmapp, &iter); sptep;) { >>>> BUG_ON(!(*sptep & PT_PRESENT_MASK)); >>>> - rmap_printk("rmap_write_protect: spte %p %llx\n", sptep, *sptep); >>>> - >>>> - if (!is_writable_pte(*sptep)) { >>>> - sptep = rmap_get_next(&iter); >>>> - continue; >>>> - } >>>> - >>>> - if (level == PT_PAGE_TABLE_LEVEL) { >>>> - mmu_spte_update(sptep, *sptep & ~PT_WRITABLE_MASK); >>>> - sptep = rmap_get_next(&iter); >>>> - } else { >>>> - BUG_ON(!is_large_pte(*sptep)); >>>> - drop_spte(kvm, sptep); >>>> - --kvm->stat.lpages; >>> >>> It is preferable to remove all large sptes including read-only ones, the >> >> >> It can cause page faults even if read memory on these large sptse. >> >> Actually, Avi suggested that make large writable spte to be readonly >> (not dropped) on this path. > > See commits e49146dce8c3dc6f4485c1904b6587855f393e71, > 38187c830cab84daecb41169948467f1f19317e3 for issues > with large read-only sptes. > Yes, we need check the code carefully when change writable spte to be read-only, let us discuss it in the separate patchset later. :) -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html