On Thu, 17 May 2012 13:24:41 +0300 Avi Kivity <avi@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c > index 2256f51..a2149d8 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/x86.c > @@ -3130,7 +3130,9 @@ int kvm_vm_ioctl_get_dirty_log(struct kvm *kvm, struct kvm_dirty_log *log) > kvm_mmu_write_protect_pt_masked(kvm, memslot, offset, mask); > } > if (is_dirty) > - kvm_flush_remote_tlbs(kvm); > + kvm_mark_tlb_dirty(kvm); > + > + kvm_cond_flush_remote_tlbs(kvm); > > spin_unlock(&kvm->mmu_lock); Any reason not to move this flush outside of the mmu_lock in this patch series? Unlike other rmap write protections, this one seems to be simple. Takuya -- 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
