On Wed, Dec 14, 2022 at 01:39:58PM -0600, Michael Roth wrote: > diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c > index a0c41d391547..2713632e5061 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c > +++ b/arch/x86/kvm/mmu/mmu.c > @@ -7183,3 +7183,8 @@ void kvm_arch_set_memory_attributes(struct kvm *kvm, > kvm_update_lpage_private_shared_mixed(kvm, slot, attrs, > start, end); > } > + > +void kvm_arch_invalidate_restricted_mem(struct kvm_memory_slot *slot, gfn_t start, gfn_t end) > +{ > + static_call_cond(kvm_x86_invalidate_restricted_mem)(slot, start, end); Why _cond? > @@ -258,6 +263,17 @@ void restrictedmem_unregister_notifier(struct file *file, > struct restrictedmem_notifier *notifier) > { > struct restrictedmem_data *data = file->f_mapping->private_data; > + struct inode *inode = file_inode(data->memfd); > + > + /* TODO: this will issue notifications to all registered notifiers, First of all: verify_comment_style: WARNING: Multi-line comment needs to start text on the second line: [+ /* TODO: this will issue notifications to all registered notifiers,] Then, if you only want to run the callbacks for the one going away only, why don't you simply do: mutex_lock(&data->lock); notifier->ops->invalidate_start(notifier, 0, inode->i_size >> PAGE_SHIFT); notifier->ops->invalidate_end(notifier, 0, inode->i_size >> PAGE_SHIFT); list_del(¬ifier->list); mutex_unlock(&data->lock); here? -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette