On Wed, Oct 06, 2021, David Stevens wrote: > On Wed, Oct 6, 2021 at 12:41 AM Sean Christopherson <seanjc@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hrm, this fails to free the gfn_track allocations for previous memslots. The > > on-demand rmaps code has the exact same bug (it frees rmaps for previous lpages > > in the _current_ slot, but does not free previous slots). > > > > And having two separate flows (and flags) for rmaps vs. gfn_track is pointless, > > and means we have to maintain two near-identical copies of non-obvious code. > > I agree that's better than my patch. I can put together a new patch > once it's decided whether or not my patch should be dropped. All yours, unless Paolo wants to fight you for it :-) I'm totally ok doing cleanup/fixes on top.
