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-ia64-devel

RE: [Xen-ia64-devel] a potential issue in set/get-rse-reg function

To: "Matt Chapman" <matthewc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: [Xen-ia64-devel] a potential issue in set/get-rse-reg function
From: "Xu, Anthony" <anthony.xu@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2005 18:09:31 +0800
Cc: xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivery-date: Tue, 13 Sep 2005 10:07:16 +0000
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
List-help: <mailto:xen-ia64-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Discussion of the ia64 port of Xen <xen-ia64-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-ia64-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-ia64-devel>, <mailto:xen-ia64-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-ia64-devel>, <mailto:xen-ia64-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
Sender: xen-ia64-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thread-index: AcW4Rt+W6Vky7ztdRSmkl8mokQ+fnwAABSNg
Thread-topic: [Xen-ia64-devel] a potential issue in set/get-rse-reg function
>As far as I know, existing processor implementations (i.e. Itanium 1
>& Itanium 2) only implement lazy mode.  Is this no longer true...?
Sorry, I don't know the answer, the Montecito I used only implement lazy mode 
from the result of pal call(RSE_INFO), but for software implementation, we must 
support eager mode.

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Matt Chapman [mailto:matthewc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
>Sent: 2005年9月13日 17:38
>To: Xu, Anthony
>Cc: Magenheimer, Dan (HP Labs Fort Collins);
>xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: Re: [Xen-ia64-devel] a potential issue in set/get-rse-reg function
>
>Anthony,
>
>As far as I know, existing processor implementations (i.e. Itanium 1
>& Itanium 2) only implement lazy mode.  Is this no longer true...?
>
>Matt
>
>
>On Tue, Sep 13, 2005 at 05:07:36PM +0800, Xu, Anthony wrote:
>> Dan,
>>
>> In current implementation, Guest stack register of current guest
>> function can be saved in hypervisor backing store or/and guest backing
>> store, if some saved in guest backing store, set/get-rse-reg will
>> directly access guest backing store, at this time, tlb miss may happen.
>> But tlb miss handler only search guest vhpt not guest page table, that
>> means it is possible hypervisor can't handle this tlb miss and inject
>> tlb miss to guest kernel, at this situation, I think hypervisor can't
>> inject tlb miss to guest kernel.
>> One explicit solution is in ivt.S set rse to lazy mode before do 'cover'
>> to make sure guest stack register of current guest function are all
>> saved in hypervisor backing store. Yes this solution will penalize
>> performance, but just a little, because there are only about ten
>> assembly instructions between 'cover' and 'mov ar.rse=0' in current
>> implementation.
>> What's your opinion?
>>
>> Thanks
>> Anthony.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Xen-ia64-devel mailing list
>> Xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ia64-devel

_______________________________________________
Xen-ia64-devel mailing list
Xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ia64-devel

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