Re: [PATCH V5 1/4] kvm: remove redundant reserved page check

[Yi Zhang]

On 2018-09-08 at 02:03:28 +0800, Zhang Yi wrote:
> PageReserved() is already checked inside kvm_is_reserved_pfn(),
> remove it from kvm_set_pfn_dirty().
> 
> Signed-off-by: Zhang Yi <yi.z.zhang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Zhang Yu <yu.c.zhang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Reviewed-by: David Hildenbrand <david@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Acked-by: Pankaj Gupta <pagupta@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  virt/kvm/kvm_main.c | 8 ++------
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
> index 8b47507f..c44c406 100644
> --- a/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
> +++ b/virt/kvm/kvm_main.c
> @@ -1690,12 +1690,8 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kvm_release_pfn_dirty);
>  
>  void kvm_set_pfn_dirty(kvm_pfn_t pfn)
>  {
> -	if (!kvm_is_reserved_pfn(pfn)) {
> -		struct page *page = pfn_to_page(pfn);
> -
> -		if (!PageReserved(page))
> -			SetPageDirty(page);
> -	}
> +	if (!kvm_is_reserved_pfn(pfn))
> +		SetPageDirty(pfn_to_page(pfn));
>  }
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(kvm_set_pfn_dirty);
>  
> -- 
> 2.7.4
>
Hi Paolo,
We will remove the reserved flag in dax pages, then patch 2[3,4]/4 is
unnecessary,  can we queue this 1/4 to next merge? 

Thank you very much.
Yi