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] Re: [PATCH] Support swap a page from user space tools--

To: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxxxx>, Yunhong Jiang <yunhong.jiang@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH] Support swap a page from user space tools-- Was RE: [RFC][PATCH] Basic support for page offline
From: Keir Fraser <keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2009 09:48:32 +0000
Cc: Tim Deegan <Tim.Deegan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Fri, 20 Mar 2009 02:49:03 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <49C37322.76E4.0078.0@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>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thread-index: AcmpQBgMyh4l7klCQruyg/t8oHUM/gAAO9rV
Thread-topic: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH] Support swap a page from user space tools-- Was RE: [RFC][PATCH] Basic support for page offline
User-agent: Microsoft-Entourage/
On 20/03/2009 09:42, "Jan Beulich" <jbeulich@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>> Ah yes, I found the email now. Well I'm still confused as to why it is
>> needed. It seems to me you could scan for all PTEs mapping old_pfn, stash
>> them in a list and temporarily make them not-present, and take a copy of
>> old_pfn. Then do a normal XENMEM_exchange: on failure revert all PTEs, on
>> success switch over all PTEs and copy old_pfn data into new_pfn. Well it is
>> more hypercalls (two updates per PTE) I suppose, but I doubt this matters
>> unless you're offlining a lot of pages, and we don't support offlining
>> memory banks really at the moment. Also some of this will potentially batch
>> up into multicalls or MMUOP_ lists nicely anyway.
> A normal XENMEM_exchange wouldn't work here, would it? The old page
> must have no other references for it to succeed, and will go back to the
> allocator right afterwards - it's contents won't be recoverable. This would
> probably require a new flag to XENMEM_exchange (which I agree would be
> much simpler than adding a full-blown new [sub-]hypercall).

If the XENMEM_exchange succeeds then you don't need the old_pfn any more.
You only need recover if the excahnge fails, and in that case the page isn't
released by XENMEM_exchange. This is my understanding at least. :-) I'm
trying to work out whether I'm wrong or whether the extra Xen bits are not

 -- Keir

Xen-devel mailing list

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