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-ppc-devel

[Xen-devel] RE: Linux PG_arch_1 conflict

To: "Hollis Blanchard" <hollisb@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [Xen-devel] RE: Linux PG_arch_1 conflict
From: "Magenheimer, Dan (HP Labs Fort Collins)" <dan.magenheimer@xxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 13:11:05 -0800
Cc: xen-ppc-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivery-date: Fri, 10 Mar 2006 21:12:00 +0000
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
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
Thread-index: AcZEhY6mfiFzuPo3TTSzBFlrEilI1wAAEmtQ
Thread-topic: Linux PG_arch_1 conflict
>
http://lists.xensource.com/archives/html/xen-devel/2005-12/msg00238.html
> > 
> > 
> > The issue is that PG_arch_1 is reserved for arch-specific
> > usage, the paravirtualization changes for Xenlinux utilize
> > it (to mark foreign pages) because it was otherwise unused
> > in Linux/x86.  But Xen is no longer an arch.
> > 
> > Grep'ing for "PageForeign" in -sparse will show most (all?)
> > of the actual uses of it.  Nearly all are in x86-specific
> > code.  But one is in netback_init().
> 
> That thread seems to already have a solution. Has anybody run it past 
> Linux MM people? (Adding xen-devel to CC for greater exposure.)

If by "solution" you mean that Keir could change Xenlinux to
add a new "PG_foreign" bit and change Xenlinux/x86 (and netback)
to use that bit rather than PG_arch_1, I agree.

Comments, Keir (or others)?

Dan

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

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