|  |  | 
  
    |  |  | 
 
  |   |  | 
  
    |  |  | 
  
    |  |  | 
  
    |   xen-devel
Re: [Xen-devel] 32-on-64: pvfb issue 
| On Thu, 2007-01-18 at 18:31 +0000, Keir Fraser wrote:
> This is even better than with blkfront/blkback because there are definitely
> no PV-on-HVM pvfb driver frontends out in the wild (and it's HVM that makes
> things harder).
PV on HVM for fbfront is pretty hard since the kernel.org tree does not
export zap_page_range to modules, neither do many of the older distro
kernels I've looked at.
I tried doing a compat version like with other such functions but it
ended up pulling half of mm/memory.c into the compat layer which I don't
like.
Do I vaguely recall plans to get rid of the use of zap_page_range or is
my memory playing tricks?
Ian.
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
 | 
 
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |  | 
Re: [Xen-devel] 32-on-64: pvfb issue, (continued)
[Xen-devel] 32-on-64 broken in unstable., Gerd Hoffmann
Re: [Xen-devel] 32-on-64 broken in unstable., Keir Fraser
Re: [Xen-devel] 32-on-64 broken in unstable., Gerd Hoffmann
Re: [Xen-devel] 32-on-64: pvfb issue, Markus Armbruster
Re: [Xen-devel] 32-on-64: pvfb issue, Gerd Hoffmann
Re: [Xen-devel] 32-on-64: pvfb issue, Keir Fraser
Re: [Xen-devel] 32-on-64: pvfb issue, Markus Armbruster
Re: [Xen-devel] 32-on-64: pvfb issue, Gerd Hoffmann
Re: [Xen-devel] 32-on-64: pvfb issue,
Ian Campbell <=
Re: [Xen-devel] 32-on-64: pvfb issue, Markus Armbruster
[Xen-devel] Does vt-x itself have perf. impact on Hypervisor w/o	considering HVM?, Liang Yang
[Xen-devel] RE: [Xen-users] Does vt-x itself have perf. impact on Hypervisor w/o considering HVM?, Petersson, Mats
[Xen-devel] Re: [Xen-users] Does vt-x itself have perf. impact on	Hypervisor w/o considering HVM?, Liang Yang
[Xen-devel] RE: [Xen-users] Does vt-x itself have perf. impact on Hypervisor w/o considering HVM?, Petersson, Mats
 |  |  | 
  
    |  |  |