 Home |
Products |
Support |
Community |
News |
xen-devel
[Xen-devel] how page faults are handled in paravirtualized xen guests?
| To: | "Xen Developers" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | [Xen-devel] how page faults are handled in paravirtualized xen guests? |
| From: | weiming <zephyr.zhao@xxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Sat, 8 Mar 2008 20:50:55 -0500 |
| Delivery-date: | Sat, 08 Mar 2008 17:51:17 -0800 |
| Dkim-signature: | v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:mime-version:content-type; bh=/ltTQrPuAcqEAXboQlSDXH96uMWUTiKObtz4Seo93wA=; b=QmYQyxxAtVrylWy/jvnZtsuhP1Ofu1hKisqeVkcLzXsn9f2JGtkD9opEViiPztRhoowR5dHkXn6N2o+ERwBO2eyF9AoBaTyJ8rc1dpOtEFkw0CFu/qA4jcpdD7trtD3OfnwBUGaYy9ZQSixlImQRJ2OaiJff0JZVAIivRYWMZF0= |
| Domainkey-signature: | a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:mime-version:content-type; b=g6cBtE148A+vCIz9H+FIRimcO5+bIadiZGi85ihC7BgQdJTgerinGxsBFfKjUwqq2vzB1gb5tULz5QoDjSj62ABVTahAFGsUNmRYrW5ITXzpimv9I85EQIt8hn89PQ88Q3q40ZTRZcsGEX5gJigZQoBq8+zZFW0iWWOJ/sBYvbU= |
| 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 |
|
Hi, I got contradicted information about the path of page fault handling under para-virtualized linux: 1) From some web resources: page fault interruption is trapped by xen hypervisor and it then dispatches to corresponding guest OS 2) From the book "a definitive guide to xen hypervisor": when a guest is scheduled to run by hypervisor, hypervisor installes the guest's IDT (except for special interrupts like timer) to CPU. So almost all interrupts are handled by guest OS directly, bypassing the xen hypervisor. Which one is correct? (My guess is second one because it's more efficient) Thanks Weiming _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | [Xen-devel] question about xen virtual base address, Agarwal, Lomesh |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [Xen-devel] how page faults are handled in paravirtualized xenguests?, 房海峰 |
| Previous by Thread: | [Xen-devel] question about xen virtual base address, Agarwal, Lomesh |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [Xen-devel] how page faults are handled in paravirtualized xenguests?, 房海峰 |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |
