|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
xen-devel
RE: [Xen-devel] Question about implementation of 32-bit guestson64-bit h
To: |
"Keir Fraser" <Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Vessey, Bruce A" <Bruce.Vessey@xxxxxxxxxx>, <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
Subject: |
RE: [Xen-devel] Question about implementation of 32-bit guestson64-bit hypervisor (IDT-related) |
From: |
"Nakajima, Jun" <jun.nakajima@xxxxxxxxx> |
Date: |
Fri, 7 Dec 2007 21:54:27 -0800 |
Cc: |
Ian Pratt <Ian.Pratt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Guminski, Stephen A" <Stephen.Guminski@xxxxxxxxxx>, Mark Williamson <mark.williamson@xxxxxxxxxxxx> |
Delivery-date: |
Fri, 07 Dec 2007 21:57:41 -0800 |
Envelope-to: |
www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
In-reply-to: |
<C37F797B.11169%Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx> |
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> |
References: |
<C37F745E.1115B%Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <C37F797B.11169%Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx> |
Sender: |
xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
Thread-index: |
Acg48YXl4py+oS2vQwSgG5xRZucqnQADRenAAATU4YAAAt1pEgAAww/TAA9i1rA= |
Thread-topic: |
[Xen-devel] Question about implementation of 32-bit guestson64-bit hypervisor (IDT-related) |
Keir Fraser wrote:
> On 7/12/07 22:06, "Keir Fraser" <Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > Yes. I believe that the Intel manuals are incorrect in stating that
PAE
> > pagetables are restricted to 36-bit addressing. Processors which
support
> > long mode have their physical address size advertised in CPUID, and
I'm
> > pretty sure that addresses up to that size can be poked into 8-byte
> > pagetable entries whether the pagetable format is 64-bit-mode or
pae-mode.
> > AMD state explicitly in their manual that PAE pagetables can address
up to
> > 52 bits, just like 64-bit pagetables, and that this is the
architectural
> > limit. Furthermore, you guys (Unisys) have done testing on big
memory ES7000
> > systems (>128GB), and those are Intel boxes -- and I expect some of
your
> > testing has been 32-bit HVM guests? Given we allocate larger
addresses
> > first, this would confirm that Intel really does allow addresses
>64GB in
> > PAE pagetables in practice.
>
> Although Intel SDM Vol 3A Section 3.8 makes it look like PAE only
supports
> 36-bit addressing, the manual simply hasn't been updated properly.
There are
> various references elsewhere in Vol 3 that make it clear that PAE
addressing
> is extended on Intel64 processors that have more address lines. The
clearest
> statement I can find is the second footnote of Section 22.3.1.6 in Vol
3B
> (the latest Vol 3B, dated Nov 2007). I'm glad Intel don't hide these
details
> away. ;-)
You should be able to find this in SDM Vol 3A:
3.8.1 Enhanced Legacy PAE Paging
On Intel 64 processors, the page directory pointer entry supports
physical address size of the underlying implementation (reported by
CPUID.80000008H). Legacy PAE enabled paging [see Section 3.8.2, "Linear
Address Translation With PAE Enabled (4-KByte Pages)" and Section 3.8.3,
"Linear Address Translation With PAE Enabled (2-MByte Pages)"] can
address physical memory greater than 64-GByte if the implementation's
physical address size is greater than 36 bits.
>
> -- Keir
>
Jun
---
Intel Open Source Technology Center
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
<Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread>
|
- [Xen-devel] Question about implementation of 32-bit guests on 64-bit hypervisor (IDT-related), Vessey, Bruce A
- Re: [Xen-devel] Question about implementation of 32-bit guests on 64-bit hypervisor (IDT-related), Keir Fraser
- RE: [Xen-devel] Question about implementation of 32-bit guests on64-bit hypervisor (IDT-related), Ian Pratt
- Re: [Xen-devel] Question about implementation of 32-bit guests on64-bit hypervisor (IDT-related), Mark Williamson
- RE: [Xen-devel] Question about implementation of 32-bit guests on64-bit hypervisor (IDT-related), Vessey, Bruce A
- RE: [Xen-devel] Question about implementation of 32-bit guests on64-bit hypervisor (IDT-related), Vessey, Bruce A
- Re: [Xen-devel] Question about implementation of 32-bit guests on64-bit hypervisor (IDT-related), Keir Fraser
- Re: [Xen-devel] Question about implementation of 32-bit guests on64-bit hypervisor (IDT-related), Keir Fraser
- RE: [Xen-devel] Question about implementation of 32-bit guestson64-bit hypervisor (IDT-related),
Nakajima, Jun <=
- Re: [Xen-devel] Question about implementation of 32-bit guestson64-bit hypervisor (IDT-related), Keir Fraser
|
|
|
|
|