On Sun, Oct 13, 2013 at 12:31:29PM +0300, Gleb Natapov wrote: > On Sat, Oct 12, 2013 at 10:36:36AM -0700, Christoffer Dall wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 02, 2013 at 02:22:27PM -0700, Christoffer Dall wrote: > > > The current KVM code relies on a number of definitions to exist for each > > > architecture: > > > KVM_HPAGE_GFN_SHIFT > > > KVM_NR_HPAGE_SIZES > > > KVM_PAGES_PER_HPAGE > > > > > > However, these defines are only used in the gfn_to_index function, which > > > is only used in the x86 code. This series moves the gfn_to_index > > > function from the generic KVM code into the x86 world and gets rid of > > > the definitions from archiectures that don't use them. s390 actually > > > uses these values in other code, so we leave that part untouched. > > > > > > Patches based on kvm/next and available here: > > > git://git.linaro.org/people/cdall/linux-kvm-arm.git kvm-pagesize-cleanup > > > > > > Christoffer Dall (6): > > > KVM: Move gfn_to_index to x86 specific code > > > KVM: ARM: Get rid of KVM_HPAGE defines > > > KVM: arm64: Get rid of KVM_HPAGE defines > > > KVM: mips: Get rid of KVM_HPAGE defines > > > KVM: ia64: Get rid of KVM_HPAGE defines > > > KVM: PPC: Get rid of KVM_HPAGE defines > > > > > > > Any comments on this one? I'd very much like to merge huge page support > > for KVM/ARM during the next merge window and it depends on this > > series. > > > Looks fine to me, but why have you skipped s390? > Because the defines are actually used in their code, see above: "... s390 actually uses these values in other code, so we leave that part untouched." Will you apply these from the mailing list or should I send you a pull request? Thanks, -Christoffer -- 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
