[PATCH v4 21/21] KVM: selftests: Test READ=>WRITE dirty logging behavior for shadow MMU

[Yosry Ahmed]

On Thu, Jan 08, 2026 at 12:29:09PM -0800, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 08, 2026, Yosry Ahmed wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 08, 2026 at 10:31:22AM -0800, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jan 08, 2026, Yosry Ahmed wrote:
> > > > >  	/*
> > > > > -	 * Add an identity map for GVA range [0xc0000000, 0xc0002000).  This
> > > > > +	 * Add an identity map for GVA range [0xc0000000, 0xc0004000).  This
> > > > >  	 * affects both L1 and L2.  However...
> > > > >  	 */
> > > > > -	virt_map(vm, GUEST_TEST_MEM, GUEST_TEST_MEM, TEST_MEM_PAGES);
> > > > > +	virt_map(vm, TEST_MEM_BASE, TEST_MEM_BASE, TEST_MEM_PAGES);
> > > > >  
> > > > >  	/*
> > > > > -	 * ... pages in the L2 GPA range [0xc0001000, 0xc0003000) will map to
> > > > > -	 * 0xc0000000.
> > > > > +	 * ... pages in the L2 GPA ranges [0xc0001000, 0xc0002000) and
> > > > > +	 * [0xc0003000, 0xc0004000) will map to 0xc0000000 and 0xc0001000
> > > > > +	 * respectively.
> > > > 
> > > > Are these ranges correct? I thought L2 GPA range [0xc0002000,
> > > > 0xc0004000) will map to [0xc0000000, 0xc0002000).
> > > 
> > > Gah, no.  I looked at the comments after changing things around, but my eyes had
> > > glazed over by that point.
> > > 
> > > > Also, perhaps it's better to express those in terms of the macros?
> > > > 
> > > > L2 GPA range [TEST_MEM_ALIAS_BASE, TEST_MEM_ALIAS_BASE + 2*PAGE_SIZE)
> > > > will map to [TEST_MEM_BASE, TEST_MEM_BASE + 2*PAGE_SIZE)?
> > > 
> > > Hmm, no, at some point we need to concretely state the addresses, so that people
> > > debugging this know what to expect, i.e. don't have to manually compute the
> > > addresses from the macros in order to debug.
> > 
> > I was trying to avoid a situation where the comment gets out of sync
> > with the macros in a way that gets confusing. Maybe reference both if
> > it's not too verbose?
> > 
> > 	/*
> > 	 * ... pages in the L2 GPA range [0xc0002000, 0xc0004000) at
> > 	 * TEST_MEM_ALIAS_BASE will map to [[0xc0000000, 0xc0002000) at
> > 	 * TEST_MEM_BASE.
> > 	 */
> 
> Heh, your solution to a mitigate a comment getting out of sync is to add more
> things to the comment that can get out of sync :-D
> 
> Unless you feel very strongly about having the names of the macros in the comments,
> I'd prefer to keep just the raw addresses.

I don't feel strongly :)