Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 2/3] x86/mem_sharing: replace use of page_lock/unlock with our own lock

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 26.04.19 at 02:12, <tamas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I would be OK with putting the whole thing behind
> CONFIG_HAS_MEM_SHARING and having that be off by default. Is that a
> feasible route from your POV?

So is there anything wrong with my earlier suggestion of
re-purposing the sharing field to attach a structure to the page
which contains the necessary lock? I.e. in the simplest case by
adding the lock to struct page_sharing_info itself?

As to your question above - that would be another option, of
course with the config option getting its HAS_ part dropped.
Possibly it could then even default to enabled when BIGMEM=y.
But you realize that by going this route you further increase
the risk of changes elsewhere breaking mem-sharing without
anyone noticing right away?

Jan



_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel