Am 21.08.2013 um 16:59 schrieb "Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > Alexander Graf <agraf@xxxxxxx> writes: > > > .... > >>> >>> On HV KVM yes, that would be the end of the list, but PR KVM could >>> give you entry 0 containing esid==0 and vsid==0 followed by valid >>> entries. Perhaps the best approach is to ignore any entries with >>> SLB_ESID_V clear. >> >> That means we don't clear entries we don't receive from the kernel because they're V=0 but which were V=1 before. Which with the current code is probably already broken. >> >> So yes, clear all cached entries first (to make sure we have no stale >> ones), then loop through all and only add entries with V=1 should fix >> everything for PR as well as HV. > > This is more or less what the patch is doing. The kernel already > does memset of all the slb entries. The only difference is we don't > depend on the slb index in the return value. Instead we just use the > array index as the slb index. Do we really need to make sure the slb > index remain same ? Yes, otherwise get/set change SLB numbering which the guest doesn't expect. Alex > > -aneesh > -- 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
