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: changeset 22526:7a5ee3800417

At 16:57 +0000 on 07 Mar (1299517021), George Dunlap wrote:
> > Better to use old_entry.mfn, in the spirit of the original cset
> > ("access-once semantics")?  
> I started to do that, but the one below didn't have an old_entry
> already.  
> > In fact, I suspect that to be safe, you need
> > to do an atomic RMW instead of just an atomic set, and then decide
> > whether the VT-d tables will need to be synced.
> Are we not holding the p2m lock when writing entries?

Good point. :)  I would prefer to use old_entry in both places anyway,
just for consistency with the general approach of reading once.  It
won't be any slower. 

Is this patch intended for 4.1.0?



Tim Deegan <Tim.Deegan@xxxxxxxxxx>
Principal Software Engineer, Xen Platform Team
Citrix Systems UK Ltd.  (Company #02937203, SL9 0BG)

Xen-devel mailing list