Hi,
At 05:12 +0000 on 19 Mar (1237439530), Jiang, Yunhong wrote:
> > - You're passing a physical address (of the PTE to update) in an MFN
> > field. That's not going to be big enough on all platforms. Also it's
> > pretty confusing.
>
> Yes, fixed and now named pte_addr as a uint64.
You made it an unsigned long, which is still smaller than a paddr_t on
PAE builds. And you can't just make it 64 bits in that union without
breaking the ABI; you'll need to add a new interface somewhere. Maybe
Keir can suggest a better place.
> I missed one thing in previous patch, i.e. the changes to
> xc_core_arch_map_p2m(). Originally I change that function to map the
> p2m table as rw (it is forgoted in previous mail). Now I add a new
> function xc_core_arch_map_p2m_writable() so that not break the
> original API.
OK. Are there any callers of the xc_core_arch_map_p2m() that would care
if it gave a writable mapping?
> But I'm a bit confused why the xc_domain_save.c will not use this
> function to map p2m table also? Instead, I noticed a lot of duplicate
> on these two files, I can send out a clean patch in future if it is
> ok.
I think that was just carelessness at the time the xc_core stuff went in
(and possibly also distaste at the rather scruffy state of the
xc_domain_save version). They should probably be unified at some point
if anyone has the energy. :)
Cheers,
Tim.
--
Tim Deegan <Tim.Deegan@xxxxxxxxxx>
Principal Software Engineer, Citrix Systems (R&D) Ltd.
[Company #02300071, SL9 0DZ, UK.]
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
Home