On 13.09.21 09:39, Jan Beulich wrote:
Hi Jan
> I'm prepared for the "how" aspect of the 1st patch here to end up
> controversial. Since the observed quirk will imo want dealing with,
> I'd appreciate any objection to the proposed change to be accompanied
> by an alternative suggestion. An intention of mine was to not further
> increase the number of arch hooks needed. I further realize that this
> change conflicts with Oleksandr's "xen/gnttab: Store frame GFN in
> struct page_info on Arm", at the very least contextually.
FYI, I have a rebased version of my patch on top of your patch #1
locally. I preliminary checked that combination on my setup (Arm64) and
didn't see any issues.
>
> 1: gnttab: remove guest_physmap_remove_page() call from gnttab_map_frame()
> 2: memory: XENMEM_add_to_physmap (almost) wrapping checks
>
> Jan
>
>
--
Regards,
Oleksandr Tyshchenko