This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
Home Products Support Community News


RE: [Xen-devel] [NEO 1:1] Nativedom 1:1 Mapping

To: "Keir Fraser" <Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: [Xen-devel] [NEO 1:1] Nativedom 1:1 Mapping
From: "Guy Zana" <guy@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2007 11:05:35 -0400
Delivery-date: Tue, 25 Sep 2007 08:07:25 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <C3193F53.DCC2%Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thread-index: Acf7nOHWOm+J+TgmQSWCP5gB/ehOoAAjI5gIAGo1EYA=
Thread-topic: [Xen-devel] [NEO 1:1] Nativedom 1:1 Mapping
I sent the patch for review (not for inclusion).
I know you are not very fond of the E820_1TO1 addition.

You mean it would be cleaner to mark these 1:1 chunks as reserved? Or do you 
suggest to do that completely differently?
Can you elaborate on that please?


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Keir Fraser [mailto:Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx] 
> Sent: Friday, September 21, 2007 10:29 AM
> To: Guy Zana; xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [NEO 1:1] Nativedom 1:1 Mapping 
> On 21/9/07 08:46, "Guy Zana" <guy@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > The patch may contain small vt-d code chunks, these got in 
> because of 
> > the merge, please disregard them for now.
> The patch at least needs to be cleaned up and a signed-off-by 
> line added for it to be considered for inclusion. Also as you 
> know I don't like the
> E820_1TO1 addition, and I think this can be implemented 
> without touching the common page_alloc.c.
>  -- Keir

Xen-devel mailing list