RE: [Xen-ia64-devel] Re: PMT table for XEN/IA64 (was: RE:Transparentparavirtualization vs. xen paravirtualization)

["Magenheimer, Dan (HP Labs Fort Collins)" <dan.magenheimer@xxxxxx>]

> > However, I agree with Matt that a PMT for other domains
> > (domU) is a bad idea as it creates many problems for migration,
> > save/restore, ballooning, and adding new domains to an already
> > loaded system. Further, the grant table abstraction is the primary
> > mechanism for page sharing for domU in Xen (on Xen/x86).
> > I think if domU has any knowledge of actual machine addresses,
> > the Xen team would consider this a bug that should be fixed.
> > 
> Dan:
>       I think you get right reverse solution, without PMT in 
> domU is a nightmare for migration, balloning and etc.. We 
> (Matt, Kevin and me) believe PMT for domU is a must, because 
> domU don't want to know where the physical page is located, 
> so gpn will always be from 0 for example while mfn may start 
> from any address, this is what PMT does to translate from gpn 
> to mfn. Today's dom0 is assume gpn=mfn so no PMT table yet, 
> that is what we are discussing to let dom0 have PMT same with domU.
>       I guess you are probably assuming the PMT is a Xenlinux 
> stuff, actually PMT is a HV data structure even in Xen/X86 
> and Xen/IA64-VTi. HV need to use PMT to insert machine side 
> TLB for example, and sharing HV PMT to paravirtualized guest 
> should be done so that VBD and VNIF can refer to. With PMT in 
> dom0, we are just stepping toward close to Xen/X86 and reduce 
> various maintaince effort and deviation.

Well clearly we are not on the same page regarding the definition
of PMT, so it is good for you to define what you mean.  I did
assume that you were referring to a data structure that is
accessible to both domain and hypervisor. This is what Matt and I are
arguing against for domU.  If it is not visible, there is already
a "PMT" in Xen which translates domU physical addresses to machine
addresses.  It is just implemented as a multi-level page table
rather than one large 1-1 mapping table.  (And this is necessary
because we don't want to require allocation of large contiguous memory
blocks after dom0 boots.)

So, I guess we are in agreement.  We will look at the possibility
of adding a PMT visible to both Xen and domain0 (and in the future
also driver domains) and domU's will not have access to any
machine address information via a PMT or any other data structure
(but Xen of course will need to maintain this information).
Correct?

Thanks,
Dan

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