|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
xen-devel
Re: [Xen-devel] NetBSD port and a couple of remarks
> Well not sure off hand if these problems are fixed (I had a quick scan
> through the 1.0 world but it seems like ancient history :-) I did notice
> a somewhat odd behaviour in the pinning case (dropping reference counts)
> but it's possible that I just misremember how it used to work..
I use the following patch: (against the xen-1.1 tar.gz)
diff -pru ../../xeno-1.1.bk/xen/common/domain.c xen/common/domain.c
--- ../../xeno-1.1.bk/xen/common/domain.c 2003-10-29
18:27:39.000000000 +0100
+++ xen/common/domain.c 2004-01-22 00:43:16.000000000 +0100
@@ -354,6 +378,7 @@ int final_setup_guestos(struct task_stru
net_ring_t *shared_rings;
net_vif_t *net_vif;
int i;
+ struct pfn_info *page;
if ( (p->flags & PF_CONSTRUCTED) )
return -EINVAL;
@@ -362,6 +387,9 @@ int final_setup_guestos(struct task_stru
* mem mappings - set them up.
*/
phys_l2tab = meminfo->l2_pgt_addr;
+ page = frame_table + (phys_l2tab >> PAGE_SHIFT);
+ get_page_type(page);
+ get_page_tot(page);
l2tab = map_domain_mem(phys_l2tab);
memcpy(&l2tab[DOMAIN_ENTRIES_PER_L2_PAGETABLE],
&idle_pg_table[DOMAIN_ENTRIES_PER_L2_PAGETABLE],
This will result in a $40000001 count and then after a switch to another
table and an unpin of the initial table, the count will be 0.
> Anyway: strongly recommend you move to 1.2 or 1.3-devel as there are
> a large number of improvements and bug fixes in a variety of areas. It
> also makes getting technical feedback on the list a bit easier since
> most of us are using >= 1.2.
yes, xen-1.1 was the latest version available outside of bitkeeper.
> > Finally, if someone could get me a xen-1.2 and/or xen-unstable tree out
of
> > bitkeeper, that would be much appreciated.
>
> It's all free to access, e.g. just type one of
>
> bk clone bk://xen.bkbits.net/xeno-1.2.bk
> bk clone bk://xen.bkbits.net/xeno-unstable.bk
yes, except that I don't want to deal with the bitkeeper licence and figure
out whether I'm allowed to use it or not.
christian
|
|
|
|
|