Hi Quentin,

quoted

quoted

+int pkvm_create_mappings(void *from, void *to, enum kvm_pgtable_prot prot)
+{
+       int ret;
+
+       hyp_spin_lock(&pkvm_pgd_lock);
+       ret = pkvm_create_mappings_locked(from, to, prot);
+       hyp_spin_unlock(&pkvm_pgd_lock);
+
+       return ret;
+}
+

I'm wondering whether this patch should also refactor
__pkvm_create_mappings. It doesn't quite do the exact same thing and
has different parameters.

Sorry, not sure I'm understanding your suggestion here. What do you
think should be done to __pkvm_create_mappings?

Sorry, my comment wasn't very clear, and "refactor" is the wrong word.
I think it should probably be renamed, because __pkvm_create_mappings
isn't called by pkvm_create_mappings nor by
pkvm_create_mappings_locked. It also has different parameters and
behaves slightly differently.

Thanks,
/fuad

Cheers,
Quentin

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel