On Tue, 28 Oct 2025 at 06:06, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@linaro.org> wrote:
>
> From: Richard Henderson <richard.henderson@linaro.org>
>
> Signed-off-by: Richard Henderson <richard.henderson@linaro.org>
> Reviewed-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@linaro.org>
> Signed-off-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@linaro.org>
> ---
> target/i386/hvf/hvf.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/target/i386/hvf/hvf.c b/target/i386/hvf/hvf.c
> index c0b2352b988..1e92e9b707b 100644
> --- a/target/i386/hvf/hvf.c
> +++ b/target/i386/hvf/hvf.c
> @@ -139,8 +139,8 @@ static bool ept_emulation_fault(hvf_slot *slot, uint64_t gpa, uint64_t ept_qual)
> if (slot->flags & HVF_SLOT_LOG) {
> uint64_t dirty_page_start = gpa & qemu_real_host_page_mask();
> memory_region_set_dirty(slot->region, gpa - slot->start, 1);
> - hv_vm_protect(dirty_page_start, qemu_real_host_page_size(),
> - HV_MEMORY_READ | HV_MEMORY_WRITE | HV_MEMORY_EXEC);
> + hvf_unprotect_dirty_range(dirty_page_start,
> + qemu_real_host_page_size());
> }
> }
Subject says hvf_unprotect_page, code uses hvf_unprotect_dirty_range.
I assume we can just fix the Subject.
-- PMM