WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

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/
   
 
 
Xen 
 
Home Products Support Community News
 
   
 

xen-devel

[Xen-devel] Question on save/restore mfn canonicalization

To: xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [Xen-devel] Question on save/restore mfn canonicalization
From: Andres Lagar-Cavilla <andreslc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2007 12:25:28 -0400
Delivery-date: Fri, 28 Sep 2007 09:24:49 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
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/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.12 (X11/20070530)
While exploring the paravirt save/restore code path, I noted a (seemingly) lack of consistency between where/who canonicalizes something and who un-canonicalizes. For example, the guest kernel canonicalizes the store and console mfn's in pre_suspend, but xc_domain_restore uncanonicalizes them before scheduling back the restored guest. The question is if there is a mandatory reason for this, or is just the way the code was written. Can I, e.g, fill the pfn_to_mfn_frame_list(_list) entries from "outside" and remove that code from post_suspend, or will something break?

Thanks!
Andres


_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

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