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 1/2] xen/mmu: Add workaround "x86-64, mm: Put ear

To: Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH 1/2] xen/mmu: Add workaround "x86-64, mm: Put early page table high"
From: Daniel Kiper <dkiper@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 9 May 2011 09:06:59 +0200
Cc: "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx>, "linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "hpa@xxxxxxxxx" <hpa@xxxxxxxxx>, "yinghai@xxxxxxxxxx" <yinghai@xxxxxxxxxx>, Daniel Kiper <dkiper@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Mon, 09 May 2011 00:08:44 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1105051504500.10886@kaball-desktop>
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: <1304356942-17656-1-git-send-email-konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx> <1304356942-17656-2-git-send-email-konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx> <20110503005527.GA6735@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20110503151206.GA8868@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <20110503195141.GA15775@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20110504185903.GA29903@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <alpine.DEB.2.00.1105051133570.10886@kaball-desktop> <20110505140124.GD4386@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <alpine.DEB.2.00.1105051504500.10886@kaball-desktop>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.3.28i
On Thu, May 05, 2011 at 03:06:18PM +0100, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> On Thu, 5 May 2011, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> > > In any case you are right about the fact that the change is not needed
> > > on X86_32 so if it has any bad side effects on X86_32 we can always do
> >
> > Why not? Can't you boot a 32-bit Dom0 on those machines?
> Because e820_end_of_low_ram_pfn() is not called on 32-bit,
> find_low_pfn_range() is called instead and works differently.
> AFAICT find_low_pfn_range() is not affected by the issue described in
> the previous email.

Yes, you are right. Additionally, I tested your patch with my amendments ealier
and it works on i386. I am going to prepare relevant patch today or tomorrow.


Xen-devel mailing list

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