[Xen-devel] RE: Xen c/s 18943

To:	Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject:	[Xen-devel] RE: Xen c/s 18943
From:	"Xin, Xiaohui" <xiaohui.xin@xxxxxxxxx>
Date:	Thu, 15 Jan 2009 17:30:12 +0800
Accept-language:	en-US
Acceptlanguage:	en-US
Cc:	"xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date:	Thu, 15 Jan 2009 01:30:59 -0800
Envelope-to:	www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to:	<496F0674.76E4.0078.0@xxxxxxxxxx>
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>
References:	<496F0674.76E4.0078.0@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sender:	xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thread-index:	Acl27g+/uhyBoAjMSoa/i9I5q6gxewABNGRg
Thread-topic:	Xen c/s 18943

Jan,
The func guest_physmap_mark_populate_on_demand() you have mentioned is added in 
CS 18954, which checked in AFTER 18943. One who checked in 18954 did not notice 
that.
For p2m_set_entry(), since EPT didn't use it so we need not care about it.

Thanks 
Xiaohui 

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Jan Beulich [mailto:jbeulich@xxxxxxxxxx]
>Sent: 2009年1月15日 16:49
>To: Xin, Xiaohui
>Cc: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: Xen c/s 18943
>
>I'm having the impression that this change is incomplete: Shouldn't the checks
>close to the beginning of p2m_set_entry() and
>guest_physmap_mark_populate_on_demand() also be constrained to AMD?
>
>Thanks, Jan

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

WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

xen-devel

[Xen-devel] RE: Xen c/s 18943