WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

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/
   
 
 
Xen 
 
Home Products Support Community News
 
   
 

xen-devel

Re: [PATCH] fix ia64 breakage with PHYSDEVOP_pirq_eoi_mfn (was Re: [Xen-

To: Isaku Yamahata <yamahata@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fix ia64 breakage with PHYSDEVOP_pirq_eoi_mfn (was Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 2/2] linux/x86: use shared page indicating the need for an EOI notification)
From: Keir Fraser <keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2008 10:08:50 +0000
Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivery-date: Wed, 03 Dec 2008 02:09:14 -0800
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20081203095925.GI15798%yamahata@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
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/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thread-index: AclVLyNAShLmdGVLY0mkOeot7A7blg==
Thread-topic: [PATCH] fix ia64 breakage with PHYSDEVOP_pirq_eoi_mfn (was Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 2/2] linux/x86: use shared page indicating the need for an EOI notification)
User-agent: Microsoft-Entourage/12.14.0.081024
On 03/12/2008 09:59, "Isaku Yamahata" <yamahata@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On the other hand on ia64 MMU is fully virtualized (i.e. auto translated
> phsymap mode enabled) and DMA is paravirtualized.
> So addresses for MMU and DMA have to be distinguished.
> xxx_to_machine() is used for MMU and xxx_to_bus() is used for DMA.

If you are fully virtualised then gmfn should mean gpfn, and
arbitrary_virt_to_machine() is correct, isn't it? I can't see a situation
where arbitrary_virt_to_machine() wouldn't correctly give you a gmfn (after
all, it gets you a machine address in guest context, as its name describes
:-). 

 -- Keir



_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>