On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 4:05 AM, Xiao Guangrong <xiaoguangrong@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 05/21/2013 05:01 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote: >> On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 04:30:13PM +0800, Xiao Guangrong wrote: >>>>> @@ -772,6 +810,7 @@ static gpa_t FNAME(gva_to_gpa_nested)(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, gva_t vaddr, >>>>> >>>>> return gpa; >>>>> } >>>>> +#endif >>>> >>>> Strange! >>>> >>>> Why does nested ept not need these functions? How to emulate the instruction faulted on L2? >>> >>> Sorry, i misunderstood it. Have found the reason out. >>> >> You can write it down here for future reviewers :) > > Okay. > > The functions used to translate L2's gva to L1's gpa are paging32_gva_to_gpa_nested > and paging64_gva_to_gpa_nested which are created by PTTYPE == 32 and PTTYPE == 64. > > Back to your comments on PT_MAX_FULL_LEVELS: > + #ifdef CONFIG_X86_64 > + #define PT_MAX_FULL_LEVELS 4 > + #define CMPXCHG cmpxchg > + #else > + #define CMPXCHG cmpxchg64 > + #define PT_MAX_FULL_LEVELS 2 I don't think we need to support nEPT on 32-bit hosts. So, I plan to remove such code. What do you think? -- Jun Intel Open Source Technology Center -- 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
