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


[Xen-devel] RE: [PATCH] Fixed legacy issues when extends number of vcpus

To: Keir Fraser <keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [Xen-devel] RE: [PATCH] Fixed legacy issues when extends number of vcpus > 32
From: "Zhang, Xiantao" <xiantao.zhang@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 2009 16:55:10 +0800
Accept-language: en-US
Acceptlanguage: en-US
Cc: "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Sun, 16 Aug 2009 01:56:37 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <C6AD7A39.12280%keir.fraser@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>
References: <706158FABBBA044BAD4FE898A02E4BC201C0553F1F@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <C6AD7A39.12280%keir.fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thread-index: AcoeF6u/T7x3fDZwRTGhuLTahDvILQAL2GrBAAHwiDA=
Thread-topic: [PATCH] Fixed legacy issues when extends number of vcpus > 32
Keir Fraser wrote:
> Let me think about these. For patch 1 I think we can perhaps do more
> work in the loop which matches vlapic identifiers, and thus avoid
> needing a "temporary cpumask" to remember matches. For patch 2 I've
> been intending to throw away the VMX VPID logic and share the SVM
> logic, as it flushes TLBs no more than the VMX logic and doesn't
> suffer the same problems with VPID/ASID exhaustion.

We have 2^16 vpids after removing the limit, so it should support 65535 vcpus 
runing concurrently in a system, so we don't need to consider the exhaustion 
case from this point of view ?

>  Thanks,
>  Keir
> On 16/08/2009 03:17, "Zhang, Xiantao" <xiantao.zhang@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Hi, Keir
>>   Attached two patches fixed the legacy issues after extending
>> number of vcpus to more for HVM domain.  The first one fixed vcpu
>> bitmask issue for interrupt delivery, and the second one fixed vpid
>> shortage issue after extending number of vcpus. Xiantao

Xen-devel mailing list